The following Op-Ed is written and submitted by Paul Plante.
Yes, people, pitifully dumb, as in dumb as a box of rocks or ignorant as a stump, and here I am referring specifically to Karoline Claire Leavitt, born August 24, 1997, the scholarship softball player at Saint Anselm College who studied politics and communication at Saint Anselm College and is now an American spokesperson who has served as the White House press secretary since 2025, in a Mediate article titled “Karoline Leavitt Claims China Will Pay Cost of Tariffs — Contradicting Trump, Who Said Walmart Would” by Alex Griffing on May 19th, 2025, as follows, to wit, and people, I remember learning about tariffs and the Great Depression back in seventh grade, I believe it was, so how on earth can this Karoline Claire Leavitt be this pitifully dumb:
Weijia Jiang, CBS News senior White House correspondent, pressed Trump Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt on Monday over conflicting statements coming from President Donald Trump and some of his top aides as to whether or not American companies will pay the price of his tariffs.
Leavitt’s answer appeared to be at odds with Trump’s recent claim that Walmart will need to “eat” some of the cost of his tariffs.
“President Trump and his top economic aides have repeatedly said that Americans will not pay the cost of tariffs.”
“In fact, last week, Lutnick said people have to drop the quote ‘silly arguments that consumers would pay the cost,’” Jiang began, referencing a recent statement from Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick.
“But over the weekend, as you know, the president posted that Walmart ‘should eat the tariffs and not charge the value customer anything.”
“‘I’ll be watching and so will your customers.’”
“So does he acknowledge that if companies don’t absorb the full cost, Americans will have to pay?” Jiang asked.
“Well, first of all, the CEO of Walmart made those comments about the tariffs on an early earnings call where CEOs, I believe, are legally obligated to give the most dire warnings and forecasts to their investors and stakeholders,” Leavitt replied, downplaying the warning from the CEO of Walmart – one of the country’s largest retailers.
“The reality is, is the president has always maintained that Chinese producers will be absorbing the cost of these tariffs.”
“And that is why China was so quick to hustle to the negotiating table with the United States of America.”
“They need our markets, they need our consumers,” Leavitt concluded.
end quotes
HUH?
What ignorant drivel that is!
That is the most ignorant hogwash to be heard from a white house press secretary since Karine Jean-Pierre was in there for Biden spouting ignorant horsecrap.
And what is interesting with this Karoline Claire Leavitt is that she takes her ignorant ravings about China paying the tariffs on their goods seriously, apparently having it in her head that whatever nonsense a white house press secretary spouts, something she seems to have picked up from KJP, is the God’s honest truth and then some, and that takes us back in time to 1930, and the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act (1930) which, as we were taught somewhere along the line in grade school or high school, so why doesn’t Karoline Claire Leavitt know this, significantly impacted the US economy and global trade, primarily by raising tariffs and sparking retaliatory measures from other countries, which not surprisingly led to a substantial decrease in international trade, deepening the Great Depression and contributing to the loss of confidence in the US financial system.
Why is a white house press secretary so dangerously dumb and pitifully ignorant of this episode in our nation’s history which seems quite relevant to what is going today with Trump’s tariffs which are a tax on the American people, not the Chinese as Karoline Claire Leavitt would have us believe.
And how on earth can she not know that the tariffs are a tax on the American people?
It is high school level knowledge, afterall, not something you need a JD or Ph.D in PolySci to understand.
As to the basic high school education Karoline Claire Leavitt seems to have been either denied or deprived of in her formative years, or maybe she rejected it as useless knowledge, Smoot-Hawley raised average tariffs on imports by about 20%, and then many countries responded by raising their own tariffs on US goods, effectively creating a trade war, which, according to the National Association of Manufacturers, led to a significant drop in US exports to countries that retaliated.
Accordingly, global trade experienced a sharp decline, with one estimate showing a 65% drop according to the Corporate Finance Institute, which in turn reduced the demand for American goods, contributing, not surprisingly, to economic hardship and bank failures, particularly in agricultural regions.
Smoot-Hawley worsened the Great Depression, according to the National Association of Manufacturers, because US exports plummeted from $7 billion in 1929 to $2.5 billion in 1932 according to the Corporate Finance Institute, and farm exports declined by one-third from 1929 levels by 1933.
As it should be, or once was, the Smoot-Hawley Act is often cited as a cautionary tale about the dangers of protectionism and the importance of free trade.
So why on earth, then, is Karoline Claire Leavitt so pitifully dumb when it comes to understanding tariffs?
And if she is that dumb about tariffs, what else is she pitifully dumb about?
And my goodness, why is the media regurgitating her nonsense?
There is the real question of the day.
What an over the top hit piece. You could have made your point with far fewer words. Your insulting and nasty comments in your writing style are a hallmark of the Democratic Party. Debates don’t exist anymore, only name calling and insults.
The situation with tariffs is a serious issue. Deep rooted problems need to be reversed and this is one tool. I expect some pain on many things before it settles down but the Disease needs to be cured. Left unaddressed, the outcome is much worse for our country.
I think the young lady does a good job. It’s politics so everyone exaggerates, just like your article.
Fishingman727, I positively loved your article above here, the flow of the words, the harmony of your expressions, and especially the exquisite use of the subjunctive, which you seem to have an innate knack at, where for our purposes, this in case the average reader finds the subject of the subjunctive, an art form really, outside of their ordinary frame of reference, which it may well be, being a tool of a skilled author such as yourself, afterall, the subjunctive is defined as being a grammatical mood, a type of verb form, that expresses a speaker’s attitude towards something, in this case, my analysis of white house press secretaries past and present, often indicating a hypothetical, uncertain, or emotional state, which you managed to pull off quite well, actually, and kudos to you, as a result, since it produced such an enjoyable and jocular read, given that the subjunctive as you have so skillfully employed it is used to express wishes, suggestions, opinions, doubts, or any state of unreality, such as you thinking I am a Democrat, when the reality is that I am an American citizen, instead, and there is a huge difference between the two!
For our at-home viewing audience, the subjunctive as employed by Fishingman727 above here is not a tense in the traditional sense (like past, present, or future).
Rather, it’s a mood, a category of verb forms that reflects a speaker’s perspective, and the subjunctive is used when something is not a fact, like my being a Democrat, but rather a possibility, a wish, a suggestion, or a hypothetical situation.
Have you ever thought of doing an autobiography on yourself?
If you do, please put me on the advance copy list.
Thank you and thank you for the levity you have provided us above here on an otherwise solemn holiday weekend.
And having indulged Fishingman727’s wild fantasies above here that I am a Democrat and his statement that “it’s politics so everyone exaggerates,” which is quite a statement as to what he expects from government and what it is that he will accept as his due, which is getting fed a load of bull excrement every day by a white house press secretary while being told that it is really the best prime rib he ever had, let’s go back to my question above of how on earth can white house press secretary Karoline Claire Leavitt be so pitifully dumb when it comes to understanding tariffs, and how can she not know that the tariffs are a tax on the American people, when it is high school level knowledge, afterall, not something you need a JD or Ph.D in PolySci to understand.
As to the term “politics,” which term Fishingman727 uses to justify white house press secretary Karoline Claire Leavitt, who he refers to as “the young lady,” feeding us a bunch of horse **** about who pays the tariffs, my Reader’s Digest Great Encyclopedic Dictionary defines it as follows:
politics
1. The science or art of government or of the administration and management of public or state affairs
2. The affairs or activities of those who are engaged in controlling or seeking to control a government or its offices or departments; also, the life, profession, or area of activity of such persons
3. The principles, aims or policies of a government or of the parties or groups within a government
4. The acts or practices of those who seek any position of power, authority, or advantage
5. Political sentiments or opinions
end quotes
So perhaps Fishingman727 can enlighten us as to which he was referring to when he said “It’s politics so everyone exaggerates,” which is to say, you can’t trust anyone in politics, especially white house press secretaries, which is quite a statement as to how far we have descended as a nation, when we are so very willing to accept horse crap from a white house press secretary6 as our due.
And going back to Fishingman727’s statement above that white house press secretary Karoline Claire Leavitt was exaggerating when she said that China would be paying the tariffs on their goods imposed by America, exaggeration means making something seem bigger, better, or worse than it actually is, and it is about overstating or overemphasizing a point or situation.
Exaggeration is the act of representing something as more extreme or dramatic than it is, either intentionally or unintentionally, and it can be used for various reasons, such as to create a strong impression or evoke strong feelings or to mislead or deceive others.
And if we consider his comment in the light of exaggeration by white house press secretary Karoline Claire Leavitt on the China tariffs being intended to mislead and/or deceive others, they being the gullible in America who think white house press secretaries tell the truth, or those in America who don’t mind the fact that in America, white house press secretaries cannot be trusted to even come close to the truth, because they are playing at politics, then yes, she is exaggerating.
But why?
Why is she exaggerating things in order to mislead or deceive us?
And given that this is such a basic topic, tariffs in America, which is the stuff of high school or grade school history, why would she have the impression that all of us are so stupid that we wouldn’t know she was manipulating us?
And speaking of this being a high school subject that does not require a Ph.D. in economics to understand, or a Harvard JD, the First Party System is a model of American politics used in history and political science to periodize the political party system existing in the United States between roughly 1792 and 1824, that period right after the Constitution was ratified and this country was formed as a federal Republic, and here, I would love to have the opportunity to question white house press secretary Karoline Claire Leavitt as to whether in her life she has ever heard any of this being discussed.
The First Party System in America featured two national parties competing for control of the presidency, Congress, and the states with the Federalist Party, created largely by Alexander Hamilton vying for power against the rival Jeffersonian Democratic-Republican Party formed by Thomas Jefferson and James Madison and usually called at the time the “Republican Party.”
Both parties originated in national politics, but soon expanded their efforts to gain supporters and voters in every state, with the Federalists appealing to the business community, while the Republicans appealed to the planters and farmers, and by 1796, politics in every state was nearly monopolized by the two parties, with party newspapers and caucuses becoming especially effective tools to mobilize voters.
The Federalists promoted the financial system of Treasury Secretary Hamilton, which emphasized federal assumption of state debts, a tariff to pay off those debts, a national bank to facilitate financing, and encouragement of banking and manufacturing.
The Republicans, based in the plantation South, opposed a strong executive power, were hostile to a standing army and navy, demanded a strict reading of the Constitutional powers of the federal government, and strongly opposed the Hamilton financial program, which is to say, the tariffs.
And if we go forward in time from there to 1844, what we find is that the “tariff question” was a major issue in the US presidential election between James K. Polk and Henry Clay, and my goodness, people, how can white house press secretary Karoline Claire Leavitt not know any of that?
Going back to 1844, the Democratic Party, supporting Polk, generally favored lower tariffs, while the Whig Party, supporting Clay, generally favored higher tariffs, and not surprisingly, just as is supposed to be the case again today, the tariff issue in 1844 was significant because tariffs were a major source of federal revenue and also had a significant impact on the economy, particularly in the North and South.
As anyone who bothered to read the Federalist Papers would know, tariffs, just like now, were a tax on imported goods, and they were a primary source of revenue for the federal government in the 19th century, while also having a protective function that was of benefit to Northern manufacturing industries while increasing costs for Southern agricultural exporters.
Northern industrialists generally supported tariffs to protect their businesses from foreign competition, while Southern planters often opposed tariffs because they increased the cost of imported goods and made it harder to export their agricultural products.
The tariff question had a significant impact on the economy and political landscape of the time, and it continued to be a contentious issue in the years leading up to the Civil War.
And if we drop back to July 26, 1788 and the Ratification of the Constitution by the State of New York, we find as follows wi8th respect to tariffs, also known then as the “impost,” to wit:
WE the Delegates of the People of the State of New York, duly elected and Met in Convention, having maturely considered the Constitution for the United States of America, agreed to on the seventeenth day of September, in the year One thousand Seven hundred and Eighty seven, by the Convention then assembled at Philadelphia in the Common-wealth of Pennsylvania (a Copy whereof precedes these presents) and having also seriously and deliberately considered the present situation of the United States, Do declare and make known.
And that the Congress will not lay direct Taxes within this State, but when the Monies arising from the Impost and Excise shall be insufficient for the public Exigencies, nor then, until Congress shall first have made a Requisition upon this State to assess levy and pay the Amount of such Requisition made agreeably to the Census fixed in the said Constitution in such way and manner as the Legislature of this State shall judge best, but that in such case, if the State shall neglect or refuse to pay its proportion pursuant to such Requisition, then the Congress may assess and levy this States proportion together with Interest at the Rate of six per Centum per Annum from the time at which the same was required to be paid.
end quotes
And that was two hundred thirty-seven (237) years ago, so certainly, this subject of tariffs has been with us for some long time now, and if we got a basic high school education, we all should be well aware of that fact.
So why isn’t white house press secretary Karoline Claire Leavitt?
A question for our times.
So you believe that China and other countries should put tariffs on us restrict our products to be exported to their countries is ok ? I don’t ! Your reference to previous history examples are just that Previous. Its not a tax on American s Its a needed economic adjusting tool . She may not be 100 percent accurate as no Press Secretary is But she is far better than what was there .
Hi, Bob!
So nice to see you, dude!
And here I was, saying how much I like the Cape Charles Mirror as it is about the only place left here in America where one can find some real robust Webster-Haynes type of debate among American citizens like you are not going to find anywhere on MSNBC and that is an indisputable fact, and here you are to prove my point.
In response to your question or statement that I believe that China and other countries should put tariffs on us restrict our products to be exported to their countries is ok, I actually never said anything like that at all, to be quite truthful, with you, as you deserve.
Bad enough you’re getting fed a load of bullcrap by the white house press secretary without me adding to it, n’est-ce pas?
What products of ours has China been restricting with tariffs?
According to my research, the top US exports to China include agricultural products like soybeans and corn, followed by machinery, chemicals, and pharmaceuticals while other significant exports include oil and gas, aircraft parts, and electronic components.
As to my reference to previous history examples, they are exactly that – previous examples of history, and if we ask AI, which is way smarter than any human being living or dead, who paid the price of the Smoot-Hawley tariffs, the answer we get back is as follows:
The importing company pays tariffs on imported goods, which are then often passed on to the consumer through higher prices.
The Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, also known as the United States Tariff Act of 1930, raised tariffs on imported goods, and these tariffs were paid by the importers.
And here we are back to either high school or grade school, Bob, perhaps on a day you were absent, to wit: tariffs are essentially a tax on imported goods, imposed by the government, and the importing company is responsible for paying the tariff to the government.
As to the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, while it was intended to protect domestic industries, it also had a significant negative impact on international trade, leading to retaliatory tariffs from other countries and exacerbating the Great Depression.
That is fact and history, Bob.
And with regard to your statement that “Its not a tax on American s Its a needed economic adjusting tool.” that’s hogwash and balderdash all rolled up into one.
While tariffs are levied on imported goods, which means goods coming from someplace like China to the US after someone here has ordered the goods from China and paid for them, the burden of the tariff, or tax, which is exactly what it always has been since before the US Constitution was ratified, often falls on U.S. taxpayers, including consumers and businesses.
More high school: tariffs raise the price of imported goods, which can be passed on to consumers, leading to higher costs for everyday purchases, because tariffs are imposed by the U.S. government on imported goods, meaning the importer (usually a business) is initially responsible for paying the tariff to the government, which increase the cost of the imported goods for the importer, who may then raise prices to cover the extra cost, so that consumers then experience higher prices for the imported goods, effectively bearing the cost of the tariff or tax, and that is exacerbated by the fact that domestic businesses that rely on imported goods for production may also face higher costs due to tariffs, potentially leading to higher prices for their products or even reduced production.
As the history you disregard clearly shows, tariffs can lead to a variety of economic effects, including higher prices, reduced trade, and potentially even job losses in some sectors, as was the case with Smoot-Hawley during the Great Depression, which is more high school stuff.
And how on earth did you miss it, Bob?
Did you drop out of sixth grade when you turned sixteen?
Or what?
What I personally like about the Cape Charles Mirror is that it is about the only place in America left today where one can find real Americans engaging in robust Webster-Haynes types of debates on issues of interest in our lives such as these tariffs, or imposts as they once were called, as is the case in here with Fishingman727 @ May 25, 2025 at 12:04 pm, who has called my essay above here “an over the top hit piece,” which as an American citizen, of course, he has every right to do so, since all he is doing is stating an opinion, which is not a fact.
And while in the opinion of Fishingman727 I could have made my point with far fewer words, the fact of the matter was and is that in my opinion, which counts for as much as that of Fishingman727, I needed all the words that I did use, which is why I used them.
Then for some as of yet unexplained reason, Fishingman727 goes spiraling off into outer space with his comment that “insulting and nasty comments” in my writing style are a “hallmark of the Democratic Party.”
He went spiraling off into outer space because there were no “insulting and nasty comments” in my writing style above.
Not being a member of the Democratic Party, and having absolutely no respect whatsoever for the Democratic Party, there is no sane or rational reason why I would adopt their political tactics as my own/
Why would I debase myself by doing so?
And then we come to Fishingman727 telling us that in America today, debates don’t exist anymore, only name calling and insults, and that is probably because we now have so many people in America like Karoline Claire Leavitt, born August 24, 1997, the scholarship softball player at Saint Anselm College who studied politics and communication at Saint Anselm College and is now an American spokesperson who has served as the White House press secretary since 2025 who are frankly too dumb to debate anything, and so must resort to name-calling and insults, which if one wants to be a white house spokesperson, those are the qualities on must possess as we see in the FOX News article titled “Trump supporters, Gold Star families flood Harris’ X account after Arlington attack: admin ‘killed my son’ – ‘You should be ashamed and embarrassed [about] your lack of empathy and decency as a human being,’ one Gold Star said in a message to Harris” by Emma Colton Fox News published September 1, 2024, where we had the full-throated version of Karoline Claire Leavitt unleashed as follows, to wit:
Trump campaign national press secretary Karoline Leavitt added on X that “Kamala’s stupidity led to one of the most embarrassing events in American history and 13 brave US soldiers being killed.”
“Kamala Harris bragged about being the last person in the room with Joe Biden when they decided on their terrible Afghanistan withdrawal plan,” Leavitt posted.
“She has never said their names.”
“She has never reached out to their families.”
“For this alone, Kamala does not deserve to be elected.”
“Kamala has already proven that she would be a dangerously incompetent Commander in Chief.”
end quotes
Of course, given that that was all true, maybe we can say that Karoline Claire Leavitt wasn’t really being nasty and insulting at all – it’s just politics.
And with that out of the way, when we return, it will be to hear Fishingman72 say, “The situation with tariffs is a serious issue,” which is why I bothered to pen my essay on the subject in the first place, so stay tuned, for more is yet to come.
So, with respect to robust Webster-Haynes type of debate in here, above here we have Bob @ May 26, 2025 at 12:29 pm telling us that Trump’s tariffs are not a tax on Americans, rather, in his opinion, they are a needed economic adjusting tool, which indeed is an interesting perspective on the subject of tariffs, or imposts. and then we have Fishingman727 @ May 25, 2025 at 12:04 pm telling us, after he tells us debates don’t exist anymore, only name calling and insults, the debatable proposition that the situation with tariffs is a serious issue because deep rooted problems need to be reversed and this is one tool, and he expects some pain on many things before it settles down but the Disease needs to be cured, because in his opinion, if left unaddressed, the outcome is much worse for our country.
And here, I have to say that I am not at all sure of what either of them is talking about.
Tariffs are a needed economic adjusting tool?
How so?
What exactly is it that is being adjusted?
For the record, the United States today is what it is called a service economy, meaning that a large portion of its economic activity and employment are concentrated in the service sector, and that is by choice going back to the 1970’s or 80’s, when we as a nation decided that we did not want dirty, polluting smokestack industries here in this country, and if we were going to be a service economy, those in the world we wanted to make money off of by “servicing” them needed to have money in the first place, so we sent them our factories to give them jobs so they would have the money to come here and go to Disneyland and make our economy richer.
I don’t know where Bob and Fishingman727 have been over the last fifty years or so, but I’ve been here, and I clearly recall that this shift from a manufacturing-based economy like we had right after WWII to one dominated by services as is the case today, where consumerism is what puts the money into our economy, and consumerism needs cheap overseas goods to work properly, has been occurring for decades, with industries like healthcare, education, and finance playing a major role, so that by 2005, over 81 million Americans were employed in the service sector, contributing about 80% of the nation’s GDP.
So exactly what are tariffs going to do to that equation?
And why are we punishing the Chinese for economic decisions we made in this country?
The Chinese did not steal our jobs.
We gave our jobs to the Chinese.
The US government’s decision to relocate “smokestack industries” overseas was primarily driven by economic factors, including labor costs, environmental regulations, and the desire for increased international competitiveness, and this has never been any kind of secret, this shift has been happening for decades, as countries like the US have moved from manufacturing to higher-value industries like technology and services.
Smokestack industries (those heavily reliant on manufacturing and heavy industry) are often labor-intensive and subject to stricter environmental regulations in developed countries like the US.
Relocating these industries to developing countries with lower labor costs and sometimes weaker environmental regulations can lead to cost savings for businesses in America which is why they were located off-shore in the first place.
On the other hand, by focusing on high-value, knowledge-based industries, the US believes it can improve its international competitiveness and maintain its economic growth.
So, again, what are tariffs going to do to that equation?
Besides upend it?
As if often the case here in the Cape Charles Mirror, this thread has turned out to be a conversation or discussion on several different levels, starting with me musing about why we are stuck with white house press secretaries who seem so pitifully dumb, uninformed and totally ignorant of our history as a nation and as a people, so they just make up whatever crap comes into their heads, like Karoline Claire Leavitt, born August 24, 1997, the scholarship softball player at Saint Anselm College who studied politics and communication at Saint Anselm College and is now an American spokesperson who has served as the White House press secretary since 2025, in a Mediate article titled “Karoline Leavitt Claims China Will Pay Cost of Tariffs — Contradicting Trump, Who Said Walmart Would” by Alex Griffing on May 19th, 2025, and moving from there to the subject of tariffs themselves being a tax on the importing nation, not a tax on the exporting nation, and from there to the premise of Bob @ May 26, 2025 at 12:29 pm that Trump’s tariffs are not a tax on Americans, rather, in his opinion, they are a needed economic adjusting tool, and Fishingman727 @ May 25, 2025 at 12:04 pm telling us, after he tells us debates don’t exist anymore, only name calling and insults, the debatable proposition that the situation with tariffs is a serious issue because deep rooted problems need to be reversed and this is one tool, and he expects some pain on many things before it settles down but the Disease needs to be cured, because in his opinion, if left unaddressed, the outcome is much worse for our country.
As to tariffs versus taxes, let us go back to our early history and ask this question, to wit: WAS THE STAMP ACT A TARIFF?
And the answer we get back is that no, the Stamp Act was not a tariff.
While both the Stamp Act and tariffs were forms of taxation, they differed in how they were applied and what they taxed.
The Stamp Act was a direct tax on various documents and paper goods within the colonies, while tariffs are taxes on imported goods.
And that takes us to another cause of the American Revolution where we find that the tax on tea imposed by Britain on the American colonies, particularly the three pence per pound tax in the Tea Act of 1773, was a form of tariff.
As I have been saying in here, regardless of what time period we are talking about, a tariff by definition is a tax imposed on goods imported into a country, and in this case, the British tax on tea was levied on the tea imported into the American colonies from Great Britain.
As we once learned in grade school and high school, the Tea Act itself was a complex measure aimed at aiding the financially struggling East India Company, and while it allowed the company to sell tea directly to the colonies without duties in England, it also maintained the existing three pence per pound tax, and this tax, coupled with other grievances about British rule, fueled colonial opposition and ultimately led to events like the Boston Tea Party, and the American Revolution, and our creation as a nation.
So why on earth do we find ourselves saddled with apparent simpletons in the white house press office who are so ignorant of these important details from our nation’s history?
Because this stuff isn’t taught anymore?
Or is it because people in America today simply prefer a white house spokesperson who doesn’t have a clue as to what they are on about?
Going back to at least the Korean war back in the 1950’s and the blather about “the boys will be home by Christmas,” and then bullcrap in the 1960’s about the “light at the end of the tunnel,” and moving forward to today where we have Karoline Claire Leavitt, born August 24, 1997, the scholarship softball player at Saint Anselm College who studied politics and communication at Saint Anselm College and is now an American spokesperson who has served as the White House press secretary since 2025 telling us in a Mediate article titled “Karoline Leavitt Claims China Will Pay Cost of Tariffs — Contradicting Trump, Who Said Walmart Would” by Alex Griffing on May 19th, 2025, “The reality is, is the president has always maintained that Chinese producers will be absorbing the cost of these tariffs,” if one is wise, one will realize that the very last place one is going to find either truth or fact is in a white house briefing, which takes us to a Reuters article titled “Tariff gloom weighs on US manufacturing; delivery times lengthening” by Lucia Mutikani on June 2, 2025, where we have the lie put to the assertion of Karoline Claire Leavitt that “The reality is, is the president has always maintained that Chinese producers will be absorbing the cost of these tariffs,” as follows:
WASHINGTON, June 2 (Reuters) – U.S. manufacturing contracted for a third straight month in May and suppliers took the longest time in nearly three years to deliver inputs amid tariffs, potentially signaling looming shortages of some goods.
President Donald Trump’s aggressive trade policy again dominated commentary from manufacturers in the Institute for Supply Management (ISM) survey published on Monday, and suppliers were passing on the import duties to customers.
That challenges the Trump administration’s narrative that China and other trade partners paid the tariffs.
end quotes
And seriously, people, who in their right mind would believe otherwise?
But let us not stop there, for the tariff chaos that we won’t hear Trump’s “pretty face” Karoline Claire Leavitt telling us about, to wit:
The on-again and of-again tariffs were described by some transportation equipment manufacturers as having “wreaked havoc on suppliers’ ability to react and remain profitable,” while makers of computer and electronic products viewed the duties and government spending cuts as “raising hell with businesses.”
“The outlook for the manufacturing sector looks downbeat, particularly with the initial surge in demand from front-loading now behind us,” said Matthew Martin, senior economist at Oxford Economics.
“Businesses are contending with higher input costs, supply disruptions, and domestic and foreign customers wary of committing to new orders.”
end quotes
And again, outside of those locked in the unreality of the Washington white house, who can be surprised that Trump is sowing chaos with his may be today-maybe tomarrow tariffs, which takes us back to mReuters, as follows:
The survey suggested manufacturing, which is heavily reliant on imported raw materials, had not benefited from the de-escalation in trade tensions between the White House and China.
Economists say the chaotic manner in which the import duties are being implemented is making it difficult for businesses to plan ahead, sentiments echoed by manufacturers.
Some manufacturers of transportation equipment also noted that while “vehicle manufacturers have already rolled price increases into their products to protect their bottom lines,” they had “not been as cooperative with their supply bases.”
They added “this has resulted in a high occurrence of suppliers falling into financial distress.”
Makers of electrical equipment, appliances and components said “the administration’s tariffs alone have created supply chain disruptions rivaling that of COVID-19.”
end quotes
And there, people, is quite an accomplishment, although I seriously doubt we will hear white house mouthpiece Karoline Claire Leavitt bragging it up any time soon, and if pressed, she would likely deny it was happening, which again takes us back to Reuters, to wit:
Manufacturers of paper products warned the “unresolved trade deal with China will result in empty shelves at retailers for many do-it-yourself and professional goods.”
Machinery manufacturers worried about China’s export restrictions on rare minerals.
Makers of fabricated metal products said their “Asia customers are requesting delayed shipments” because of tariffs.
end quotes
And here we come to what puts the big lie to the assertion of Karoline Claire Leavitt that the ones like China sending us the goods would be paying the tariffs, as opposed to those in this country importing them, to wit:
Suppliers are passing on the tariffs to customers.
Chemical products manufacturers reported that “the position being communicated is that the supplier considers it a tax, and taxes always get passed through to the customer,” adding “very few are absorbing any portion of the tariffs.”
“Pressure on manufacturers to pass on their costs further up the supply chain will mount as inventories dwindle, as they eventually will have to restock at much higher prices,” said Oliver Allen, senior U.S. economist at Pantheon Macroeconomics.
Production at factories remained subdued, while new orders barely saw an improvement.
The ISM survey’s forward-looking new orders sub-index inched up to 47.6 from 47.2 in April.
Factories continued to shed jobs.
The ISM Business Survey Committee Chair Susan Spence said comments from respondents reflected an acceleration of head-count reductions due to uncertain near- to mid-term demand.
“In the context of on-again, off-again tariff policy, most businesses are left sitting on their hands as they await any sign of more-persistent clarity,” said Shannon Grein, an economist at Wells Fargo.
end quotes
And that, folks, is the news you didn’t hear from white house mouthpiece Karoline Claire Leavitt, and likely won’t!
And staying with what it is we haven’t been hearing from white house mouthpiece Karoline Claire Leavitt on the serious subject of Trump’s tariffs, we first come to an AFP article titled “US private sector hiring sharply slows, drawing Trump ire” on 4 June 2025, where we have as follows. to wit:
For now, US services sector activity shrank in May for the first time since mid-2024 too, according to the Institute for Supply Management, as Trump’s tariffs fueled prices and uncertainty.
Since returning to the presidency, Trump has slapped a 10 percent tariff on most trading partners, alongside higher rates on dozens of economies, including the European Union, that have since been put on pause until early July.
He has also taken special aim at China with tit-for-tat levies between Washington and Beijing reaching three-figures before both sides reached a temporary deal to lower levels last month.
But the seesawing of Trump’s trade policies has snarled supply chains, roiled financial markets and weighed on consumer sentiment.
“Manufacturing employment is suffering from higher input costs and disruptions to supply chains.”
“At least one vehicle producer was forced to idle production during the first half of May; that is reminiscent of the pandemic,” warned KPMG chief economist Diane Swonk in a recent note.
end quotes
Of course, white house mouthpiece Karoline Claire Leavitt can say that that is just a lot of anti-Trump hoo-hah, which takes us to a CNBC article titled “Trump says ‘extremely hard’ to make a deal with China’s Xi as trade stalemate fuels calls for leaders to talk” by Anniek Bao and Evelyn Cheng on June 4, 2025, to wit:
U.S. President Donald Trump said Wednesday that it was “extremely hard” to make a deal with his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping, at a time when the White House has been suggesting the two leaders could talk this week amid rising trade tensions.
Scott Bessent, U.S. Treasury secretary, said Thursday stateside that trade talks were “a bit stalled,” and the two countries’ leaders would likely need to weigh in.
end quotes
A bit of a whiff of panic wafting off of Trump’s treasury secretary there, which moves us right along to a Reuters article titled “Canada prepares reprisals over U.S. metals tariffs, EU reports progress in talks” by David Ljunggren, Andrea Shalal and Julia Payne on June 4, 2025, where we see the peace between the United States and Canada which has existed for over a century, since the War of 1812, when the Treaty of Ghent, signed in 1814, ended the conflict and returned to the status quo ante bellum, and since then, the two nations have established a strong partnership, built on shared geography, economic cooperation, and security cooperation, being threatened, to wit:
Trump has made charging U.S. importers tariffs on goods from foreign countries the central policy of his trade wars, which have severely disrupted global trade flows and roiled financial markets.
The Republican president has long been angered by the massive federal trade deficit, saying it was emblematic of how trading partners “take advantage” of the U.S.
He sees tariffs as a tool to bring more manufacturing – and the jobs that go with that – back to the United States.
However, the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office said on Wednesday that U.S. economic output will fall as a result of Trump’s new tariffs on foreign goods that were in place as of May 13.
end quotes
And that bit about the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office saying on Wednesday that U.S. economic output will fall as a result of Trump’s new tariffs on foreign goods that were in place as of May 13 takes us to a Reuters article titled “US services sector contracts in May; businesses face higher prices” by Lucia Mutikani on June 4, 2025 for this bi8t of reality, to wit:
WASHINGTON, June 4 (Reuters) – The U.S. services sector contracted for the first time in nearly a year in May while businesses paid higher prices for inputs, a reminder that the economy remains in danger of experiencing a period of very slow growth and high inflation.
The survey from the Institute for Supply Management (ISM) on Wednesday showed uncertainty was the dominant theme among businesses as they tried to navigate President Donald Trump’s constantly shifting trade policy.
The whiplash from the tariffs that Trump has announced, paused, and imposed has left most businesses in limbo and struggling to plan ahead, to the detriment of the economy.
The Trump administration has given U.S. trading partners until Wednesday to make their “best offers” to avoid other punishing import levies from taking effect in early July.
“Until there is clarity on the trading environment, it appears that the business sector will remain wary of putting money to work,” said James Knightley, chief international economist at ING.
The ISM on Monday reported that manufacturing contracted for a third straight month in May, with suppliers taking the longest time in nearly three years to deliver inputs amid tariffs.
Businesses in the construction industry said “tariff variability has thrown residential construction supply chains into chaos,” adding that “major heating, ventilation and air conditioning equipment manufacturers are passing on their cost increases due to higher refrigerant and steel commodity prices.”
Businesses are also seeking to pass on tariffs, which are a tax, to consumers.
That effort was corroborated by a report from the New York Federal Reserve showing the majority of businesses in its district said they had passed on at least some of the tariffs in the form of higher prices in May.
That situation was reinforced by a surge in the survey’s measure of prices paid for services inputs to 68.7, the highest level since November 2022, from 65.1 in April.
end quotes
Yes, people, tariffs are indeed a tax that falls upon the people of America, which takes us to yet another Reuters article titled “US economic activity declines as tariffs pressure prices, Fed says” by Ann Saphir on June 4, 2025, where we have as follows to consider:
June 4 (Reuters) – U.S. economic activity has declined and higher tariff rates have put upward pressure on costs and prices in the weeks since Federal Reserve policymakers last met to set interest rates, the U.S. central bank said on Wednesday in its latest snapshot of the nation’s economy.
In January, all 12 Fed districts reported economic growth; the latest report showed just three did, while half reported economic declines.
Tariffs remained a rising concern, along with uncertainty, impacting in particular prices but also expectations for growth.
“In some cases, firms explicitly included a separate tariff line for items or contingencies in their price quotes and contracts,” said the San Francisco Fed, where economic activity was reported to have slowed.
“One contact observed that price increases that had been implemented in anticipation of certain tariffs were not rolled back once those tariffs were removed.”
The Cleveland Fed reported consumer spending had flattened out, with contacts saying it was hard to forecast demand because of trade policy uncertainty.
end quotes
And moving right along, we come to a Reuters article titled “NY Fed survey: Last month most firms passed on some of tariff surge” by Michael S. Derby on June 4, 2025, where we have this news on the subject of the Trump tariffs, to wit:
NEW YORK, June 4 – The majority of businesses in the New York Federal Reserve’s district said they passed on at least some of President Donald Trump’s tariffs in the form of higher prices last month, as firms flagged considerable confusion and uncertainty in navigating the surge in import taxes, a report from the bank released on Wednesday said.
As of early May, “most businesses passed on at least some of the higher tariffs to their customers, with nearly a third of manufacturers and about 45% of service firms fully passing along all tariff-induced cost increases by raising their prices,” the New York Fed report said.
Some three quarters of both types of firms passed along at least some form of tariff-related price increases.
The latest round of tariffs has brought a doubling of aluminum and steel import taxes.
At the time of the survey, factory firms estimated that their tariff level was 35% while service firms said it was 26%.
The manufacturing firms said the price increase in their tariffed goods was 20% while service firms reported a 15% price increase for customers.
The survey also found “a significant share of businesses” said they had increased prices on goods and services not affected by tariffs.
Trump and White House officials have argued that foreigners pay tariffs, a contention rejected by most economists.
The New York Fed survey also showed respondents were very unsure how things would play out.
“Businesses expressed considerable uncertainty about the future path of tariffs,” the New York Fed said.
At the same time, factory and service firms struggled to understand what level of tariffs were affecting them, and “many businesses expressed difficulty making decisions and determining the appropriate pricing strategies under such heightened uncertainty.”
end quotes
Ah, yes, along with everything else a person in business must face, let’s make things more interesting by injecting massive chaos into the picture, and for right now, folks, that is the news!
But stay tuned, for this story has legs and won’t quit running, and we will be back with more.
So, continuing on in here with what it is we can be sure of not hearing anything about from white house mouthpiece Karoline Claire Leavitt on the serious subject of the fall-out and ramifications of Trump’s tariffs, we have as follows on that very subject from a Rigzone article titled “Oil Rises as Traders See Trump-Xi Call as Sign of Easing Tension” by Bloomberg, Julia Fanzeres and Mia Gindis on June 05, 2025, to wit:
“A meeting between Xi and Trump is supportive of risk assets and crude oil as it raises the prospect of progress on tariff negotiations,” said Rebecca Babin, a senior energy trader at CIBC Private Wealth Group.
“Tariff uncertainty has been a key overhang for crude markets, with unresolved tensions prompting downward revisions to demand forecasts.”
Still, animosity between the world’s two largest economies is adding to unease about the US shale patch.
China avoided buying American crude for a second straight month, the longest run since the pandemic, a negative for American producers that partly depend on overseas demand.
end quotes
Yes, people, when a nation like the US decides, as Trump has done, to adopt an isolationist stance, as was the case following the Great War (WWI) when public sentiment in the US shifted towards isolationism, fueled by disillusionment with the war and a desire to avoid future international entanglements, which isolationist stance the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 forced the US to abandon and to instead, engage in World War II, so that following the war, the US became a global leader, participating in international organizations like the United Nations and NATO, there is a price to pay, as we are finding out all over again, which takes us to a Reuters article titled “Weekly jobless claims hit seven-month high; imports post record decline” by Lucia Mutikani on June 5, 2025, where we see the impact of Trump’s tariff policy on job creation or perhaps more appropriately, job destruction in America, to wit:
WASHINGTON, June 5 (Reuters) – The number of Americans filing new applications for unemployment benefits increased to a seven-month high last week, pointing to softening labor market conditions amid mounting economic headwinds from tariffs.
The report from the Labor Department on Thursday also continued to show workers losing their jobs having a tough time landing new opportunities as uncertainty caused by President Donald Trump’s aggressive trade policy leaves employers reluctant to increase headcount.
end quotes
Not surprisingly, businesses do not like mutability (liability or tendency to change) in public policy, which makes it difficult to impossible to plan ahead, something I don’t think Trump has ever had to think about or worry about, which subject takes us to a Reuters article titled Fed policymakers flag inflation concerns, a view that argues against rate cuts” by Ann Saphir and Michael S. Derby on June 5, 2025, where we have this to consider:
June 5 (Reuters) – A pair of Federal Reserve policymakers signaled on Thursday that they believe higher inflation is for now a more pressing risk than a slowing labor market, a view that implies support for keeping monetary policy on hold for longer.
“I see greater upside risks to inflation at this juncture and potential downside risks to employment and output growth down the road, and this leads me to continue to support maintaining the FOMC’s policy rate at its current setting if upside risks to inflation remain,” Fed Governor Adriana Kugler told the Economic Club of New York on Thursday.
Tariffs are already pushing up on prices, she said, and while there are some signs the economy is cooling it is “not yet a significant slowdown.”
Speaking a little later in the day, Kansas City Fed President Jeff Schmid expressed optimism that the economy will skirt recession as it has in the recent past.
While the extent of the tariffs’ drag on growth and employment is unclear, he too showed he is more worried about the imminent impact on inflation.
“The tariffs are likely to push up prices” by an unknown amount in coming months, Schmid said, and the effect “likely will not be fully apparent for some time.”
end quotes
And in a separate Reuters article titled “Fed’s Schmid: uncomfortable with looking through tariff-driven price push” on June 5, 2025, we have him saying further on the subject of tariff inflation, as follows:
June 5 (Reuters) – Kansas City Federal Reserve Bank President Jeff Schmid on Thursday expressed concern that tariffs could rekindle inflation, saying upward price pressure could be apparent in coming months but not fully known for much longer.
“While theory might suggest that monetary policy should look through a one-time increase in prices, I would be uncomfortable staking the Fed’s reputation and credibility on theory,” Schmid said in remarks prepared for delivery to a banking conference hosted at his regional Fed bank’s headquarters.
end quotes
Wise words there, alright, which takes us to a Reuters story titled “US aluminium premiums hit record levels after tariffs take effect” on June 5, 2025, to wit:
LONDON, June 5 (Reuters) – Premiums for consumers buying aluminium on the physical market in the United States hit a record 60 cents a lb or $1,323 a metric ton on Thursday after U.S. President Donald Trump imposed higher tariffs on U.S. imports of the metal.
The tariffs doubled to 50% on Wednesday.
The U.S. Midwest duty-paid premium has gained nearly 190% since Trump was elected in November for his second term as president.
The U.S. is heavily reliant on aluminium imports, with the vast majority from Canada.
end quotes
And if white house mouthpiece Karoline Claire Leavitt thinks that there will be no adverse impacts on the US economy, she is delusional, which takes us to a Reuters article titled “US worker productivity slumps in first quarter” on June 5, 2025, where we see some hints of possible stagflation setting in, to wit:
WASHINGTON, June 5 (Reuters) – U.S. worker productivity dropped at a faster pace than initially thought in the first quarter, driving labor costs sharply higher at a time when businesses are already facing rising costs from tariffs on imported goods.
Nonfarm productivity, which measures hourly output per worker, decreased at a 1.5% annualized rate last quarter, the Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics said on Thursday.
That was revised down from the previously reported 0.8% pace of decline and marked the first drop since the second quarter of 2022.
Corporate profits dropped in the first quarter and could come under pressure as President Donald Trump’s tariffs produce economic uncertainty that economists have warned would hamper consumer and business spending.
Airlines, retailers and motor vehicle manufacturers are among the companies to have either withdrawn or refrained from giving financial guidance for 2025, citing the uncertainty caused by the on-again, off-again nature of some of the duties.
Unit labor costs – the price of labor per single unit of output – shot up at a 6.6% rate in the first quarter.
They were revised up from the previously reported 5.7% growth pace.
Labor costs increased at a 1.9% rate from a year ago, upgraded from the previously reported 1.3% pace.
end quotes
And there, folks, is more of the news you didn’t hear from white house mouthpiece Karoline Claire Leavitt, and likely won’t, but again, stay tuned, and we’ll be back with more!
And picking up where we left off in here, as an older American, I have to wonder if white house mouthpiece Karoline Claire Leavitt and Trump treasury secretary Scott Bessent, a man very full of himself, have ever heard the expression or phrase “taxation without representation will not stand,” this with respect to Trump’s tariffs, which are a tax imposed on the American people without representation, because Trump does not “represent” the American people, and without their consent.
Here in America, or at least it once was that way, the phrase “No taxation without representation” encapsulates a core principle of democratic governance, asserting that those who are subjected to taxation should have a voice in the process of levying those taxes, typically through elected representatives.
Donald Trump is not an elected representative.
This idea, which fueled the American Revolution, argues that it is unjust and tyrannical to impose taxes on a population that lacks representation in the body that creates those taxes, because the fundamental idea is that political legitimacy for taxation stems from the consent of the governed, so that if a group of people is taxed without having any say in the matter, it’s seen as a violation of their rights.
And that brings us to a Reuters article titled “US customs duties top $100 billion for first time in a fiscal year” by David Lawder on July 11, 2025, where we have as follows on the subject of Trump’s unilaterally imposed tariff taxes on the American people, to wit:
WASHINGTON, July 11 (Reuters) – U.S. customs duty collections surged again in June as President Donald Trump’s tariffs gained steam, topping $100 billion for the first time during a fiscal year and helping to produce a surprise $27 billion budget surplus for the month, the Treasury Department reported on Friday.
The budget data showed that tariffs are starting to build into a significant revenue contributor for the federal government, with customs duties in June hitting new records, quadrupling to $27.2 billion on a gross basis and $26.6 billion on a net basis after refunds.
end quotes
And let’s rephrase that as the budget data show that Trump’s tariff taxes on the American people are starting to build into a significant revenue contributor for the federal government, with $27.2 billion on a gross basis and $26.6 billion on a net basis after refunds being removed from otherwise productive uses in the economy by being diverted into the coffers of the US treasury instead, which under this administration seems to think it is a profit-making business instead of a governmental function.
Going back to Reuters, it continues, as follows:
The budget results are likely to reinforce Trump’s view of tariffs as a lucrative revenue source and as a hammer to enforce non-trade foreign policy.
end quotes
They are indeed a lucrative revenue source for Trump because unless they change their ways and stop consuming, Trump’s tariff taxes cannot be avoided, which takes us back to Reuters for more, to wit:
He said on Tuesday that “the big money” would start to flow in after he imposes higher “reciprocal” tariffs on U.S. trading partners on August 1.
end quotes
With the “big money” flowing out of the pockets of the American people and into the pockets of Trump’s federal government.
Going back to Reuters, we have more as follows:
U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said on X that the results show the U.S. “reaping the rewards” from Trump’s tariff agenda.
“As President Trump works hard to take back our nation’s economic sovereignty, today’s Monthly Treasury Statement is demonstrating record customs duties – and with no inflation!” Bessent said.
end quotes
And as we have come to expect from federal government officials who these days seem to have a great deal of trouble separating fact from political fiction, Bessent is blowing smoke when he says there is no inflation as we see from this Reuters article titled “US prices for China-made goods on Amazon rise faster than inflation, analysis shows, as tariffs bite” by Siddharth Cavale on June 30, 2025, to wit:
NEW YORK, June 30 (Reuters) – Prices for goods made in China and sold on Amazon.com have been rising faster than overall inflation, according to an analysis of 1,400 different products conducted exclusively for Reuters by the analytics firm DataWeave, a sign that tariffs are starting to hit American consumers.
The analysis shows that price increases for those goods accelerated beginning in May, a signal U.S. President Donald Trump’s tariffs are starting to filter through to consumers.
The median price of a basket of more than 1,400 products made in China and sold on Amazon.com to U.S. buyers has gone up by 2.6% between January and mid-June, outpacing the latest U.S. inflation rate for core goods, which runs only through May.
The goods rising at the fastest rate include school and office supplies, electronic items such as printers and shredders, blank media items like CDs and DVDs, and home goods such as furnishings and cookware.
For example, a Hamilton Beach electric kettle climbed to a median $73.21 from $49.99, while the price of a GreenPan frying pan more than doubled to $31.99.
Through April, inflation across that product group remained modest.
Prices increased more sharply in May and accelerated into June, particularly in the Home & Furniture and Electronics categories, which showed a median increase of 3.5% and 3.1%, respectively, over the time frame of the study.
Numerous consumer companies have warned of tariff-led price hikes, including the largest U.S. retailer Walmart.
Department store chain Macy’s said it was selectively raising prices to offset tariffs.
Nike, which recently started selling on Amazon after a six-year break, said it would raise prices across various products starting June 1.
Trump has defended tariffs as necessary to rebalance global trade and boost U.S. manufacturing output.
end quotes
So much for what Bessent knows about anything to do with the economy and be sure to take what that dude says with a large grain of salt, but stay tuned, for there is more, much more, on this subject of Trump’s tariff taxes on the American people, so stay tuned.
So, with the thought in mind from that Reuters above here titled “US customs duties top $100 billion for first time in a fiscal year” by David Lawder on July 11, 2025 that Trump is defending his tariff taxes on the American people as necessary to boost U.S. manufacturing output, let’s examine that statement by going to another Reuters article titled “US manufacturing extends slump; inflation pressures ebbing” by Lucia Mutikani on July 1, 2024, where we have more on that story, as follows::
WASHINGTON, July 1 (Reuters) – U.S. manufacturing contracted for a third straight month in June as demand remained subdued, while a drop in a measure of prices paid by factories for inputs to a six-month low suggested that inflation could continue to subside.
end quote
So, if Trump intends for his tariff taxes on the American people to “boost U.S. manufacturing output,” it would seem that he has some heavy lifting out in front of him to get that job done in his lifetime.
And note this language: “a measure of prices paid by factories for inputs to a six-month low suggested that inflation could continue to subside.”
The ISM Manufacturing Business Survey Committee saying “inflation could continue to subside” is quite a bit different than Trump’s treasury secretary Bessent saying there is no inflation, is it not?
Going back to that Reuters article, our analysis continues as follows:
The weakness at the end of the second quarter reported by the Institute for Supply Management on Monday was across the board, with ISM Manufacturing Business Survey Committee Chair Timothy Fiore describing manufacturers as demonstrating “an unwillingness to invest in capital and inventory due to current monetary policy and other conditions.”
Manufacturing is being pressured by higher interest rates and softening demand for goods, though business investment has largely held up.
“We expect the manufacturing sector to remain weak over the next couple of quarters,” said Oliver Allen, senior U.S. economist at Pantheon Macroeconomics.
“The retreat in corporate bond yields since late last year … seems to have provided some support to investment spending, but not enough to get manufacturing growing again.”
“A much more significant loosening in financial conditions is required to change that.”
end quotes
I wonder if Trump, white house mouthpiece Karoline Claire Leavitt and Trump treasury secretary Scott Bessent, a man very full of himself, are aware of any of that reality.
Going back to Reuters, the news continues as follows:
The ISM’s manufacturing PMI slipped to 48.5 last month from 48.7 in May.
It has indicated contraction in manufacturing in 19 of the last 20 months.
Sixty-two percent of manufacturing gross domestic product contracted, up from 55% in May.
Machinery, transportation equipment, electrical equipment, appliances and components as well as computer and electronic products were among the nine industries that contracted.
Commentary from manufacturers was mostly downbeat.
Makers of chemical products reported a “high volume of customer orders.”
Transportation equipment manufacturers, however, complained that “customers continue to cut orders with short notice, causing a ripple effect throughout lower-tier suppliers.”
Makers of electrical equipment, appliances and components reported that “customers (were) ordering more to create buffer stocks, in case of future shortages.”
Manufacturers of fabricated metal products mentioned signs of weak demand, adding “we must work to reduce inventory levels.”
Machinery manufacturers said “sales backlog is decreasing,” and that they had “furloughed a portion of our workforce as a result.”
Makers of miscellaneous manufactured goods reported that the “level of production is lower due to decreased demand for products.”
end quote
Decreased demand for products, people?
Never a good sign in the business world, which again takes us back to Reuters, to wit:
Government data last week showed manufacturing contracted at a 4.3% annualized rate in the first quarter, with most of the decline coming from long-lasting manufactured goods.
Output at factories decreased for the first time since February.
Inflation at the factory gate was much cooler.
The survey’s measure of prices paid by manufacturers dropped to 52.1, the lowest reading since December, from 57.0 in May.
Factory employment slipped after briefly rebounding in May amid layoffs, attrition and hiring freezes.
end quotes
And that for the moment is the news, but stay tuned, for more is yet to come!
And before we go back in time to then-President Herbert Hoover signing the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, also known as the Tariff Act of 1930, on June 17, 1930, and thus, sealing the fate of the American people as far as the Great Depression was concerned, we need to go back to the Reuters above here titled “US customs duties top $100 billion for first time in a fiscal year” by David Lawder on July 11, 2025, where we have further background on Trump’s tariff taxes to consider, to wit:
For the first nine months of fiscal 2025, the customs take reached records of $113.3 billion on a gross basis and $108 billion on a net basis, nearly double the prior-year collections.
Based on those results, tariffs have now grown into the fourth-largest revenue source for the federal government, behind individual withheld receipts at $2.683 trillion for the fiscal year, non-withheld individual receipts at $965 billion and corporate taxes at $392 billion.
end quotes
And back on June 17, 1930, when President Herbert Hoover signed the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act (also known as the Tariff Act of 1930) in an effort to protect American industries from foreign competition during the Great Depression, he too believed it would stimulate the American economy by raising tariffs on over 20,000 imported goods, thus encouraging consumers to buy domestically produced products, and additionally, as is the case again today, there was a need to generate revenue for the federal government, which takes us back to Reuters, to wit:
In the space of roughly four months, tariffs as a share of federal revenue have more than doubled to around 5% from about 2% historically.
The June budget surplus represented a turnaround from the $71 billion deficit in June 2024.
The new tariff-related revenue helped boost total budget receipts last month by 13%, or $60 billion, to $526 billion, a record for that month, the Treasury said.
The overall year-to-date deficit, however, increased 5%, or $64 billion, to $1.337 trillion, as outlays rose for health care programs, Social Security retirement benefits, defense spending, debt interest and the Department of Homeland Security, the Treasury said.
The Treasury’s interest costs on the national debt continued to grow, exceeding all other individual outlays at $921 billion for the first nine months of the fiscal year, up 6%, or $53 billion, from the year-ago period.
end quotes
Focus in on that figure, people – the Treasury’s interest costs on OUR national debt exceeds all other individual outlays at $921 billion for the first nine months of the fiscal year, up 6%, or $53 billion, from the year-ago period.
And some of that money, which comes out of our economy, goes to China, because China buys our national debt to keep the lights on in Washington, D.C.
Going back to Reuters, it continues as follows:
Bessent earlier this week suggested a steeper ramp-up in tariff collections, telling a cabinet meeting that calendar-year 2025 collections could grow to $300 billion by the end of December.
At the June run rate, gross customs collections would hit $276.5 billion in six months’ time, which means reaching Bessent’s target would require some increases.
Ernie Tedeschi, economics director of the Budget Lab at Yale University, said it may take more time for the tariff revenue to fully ramp up because businesses and consumers have sought to front run the duties by buying ahead.
Once that effect fades and Trump implements higher “reciprocal tariff” rates after an August 1 deadline, the Treasury may collect an extra $10 billion in tariffs per month, bringing the total to $37 billion, he said.
“I think there’s a significant risk…that we get addicted to tariff revenue,” said Tedeschi, who served as a White House economic adviser during the Biden administration.
He added that tariff income could fade over time as businesses and consumers adjust their behavior.
But Trump this week has ratcheted up his tariff actions, announcing 50% levies on copper imports and goods from Brazil and a 35% tariff on Canadian goods, all due to start on August 1.
The Trump administration is preparing more sector-based tariffs on semiconductors and pharmaceuticals.
end quotes
And that for the moment, people, is the news!
But don’t away, because this story is just now beginning!
Will we escape the results of Hoover signing Smoot-Hawley on June 17, 1930?
Or are we doomed to follow the same path down?
Stay tuned!
Life in the fast lane, people, fasten your seatbelts, for the ride might get a bit hairy, as we now have a man in the White House who seems impervious to reality, and if he actually went to high school, either he didn’t pay attention or he didn’t care to learn, or like Hussein Obama, he was simply there as a “pass-through,” someone special who was part of a quota system or affirmative action program for those in America handicapped by bone spurs.
For example, consider the Reuters article titled “Trump says U.S. interest rate is at least 3 points too high” on July 9, 2025, where we have as follows:
WASHINGTON, July 9 (Reuters) – U.S. President Donald Trump on Wednesday called on the Federal Reserve to lower the federal benchmark interest rate by at least 3 percentage points, renewing his call for the U.S. central bank to lower rates to help reduce the cost to service the nation’s debt.
“Our Fed Rate is AT LEAST 3 Points too high.”
“’Too Late’ is costing the U.S. 360 Billion Dollars a Point, PER YEAR, in refinancing costs.”
“No Inflation, COMPANIES POURING INTO AMERICA.”
“The hottest Country in the World!”
“LOWER THE RATE!!!” Trump wrote on Truth Social.
end quotes
Except Trump doesn’t know what he is talking about, and is clearly confused there, which brings us to a MarketWatch article titled “Housing market is sending a stark warning to the U.S. economy, Moody’s economist says” by Aarthi Swaminathan on 15 July 2025, where we have as follows on that same subject, to wit:
In his call for lower mortgage rates, Zandi joins Bill Pulte, the director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency.
Pulte has been pushing for the Federal Reserve to lower interest rates, which he says will make housing more affordable.
Pulte has criticized Fed Chair Jerome Powell, saying in a post on X that Powell is “doing a great injustice to this Country” by not lowering rates.
Mortgage rates, however, don’t directly follow the direction of the Fed’s benchmark rate.
Rather, they tend to move in tandem with the yield on 10-year Treasury notes.
The 30-year fixed-rate mortgage averaged 6.83% as of Monday afternoon, according to Mortgage News Daily.
end quotes
Powell and the fed have absolutely nothing to do with the rates on the 10-year bond and 30-year bond.
That is a function of the treasury market, and while Trump is sniveling and whining and crying about how high bond rates are in America. let’s go to his own treasury site to see what kind of interest rates he and Bessent are paying, to wit:
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Daily Treasury Bill Rates
07/14/2025
4 week: 4.25
6 week: 4.25
8 week: 4.27
13 week: 4.26
17 week: 4.23
26 week: 4.13
52 week: 3.91
end quotes
So, if Trump is really concerned about high interest rates on US debt, which he is wracking up at a record pace, the man he needs to talk to is named Scott Bessent, not Jerome Powell.
And on that same subject of who is causing high interest rates here in America on the massive debt he is wracking up, let’s go to a Reuters article titled “Investors seek protection from risk of Fed chief’s ouster” by Carolina Mandl, Matt Tracy and Gertrude Chavez-Dreyfuss on July 15, 2025, where we have this bit of reality Trump cannot seem to comprehend, to wit:
U.S. Treasury 30-year yields on Tuesday topped 5% for the first time since late May, as investors fretted about the country’s huge fiscal deficit and assessed the risk of Powell’s exit from the central bank.
end quote
The enemy of our economy is not in the Eccles building where the fed is housed, people!
The real enemy of our economy is in the Washington white house, which brings us to a Reuters article titled “US consumer prices rise in June as tariff pass-through begins” by Lucia Mutikani on July 15, 2025, where we have this on the inflation Trump’s delusional treasury secretary Scott Bessent tells us we are not having as a result of Trump’s tariff taxes on the American people, to wit:
WASHINGTON, July 15 (Reuters) – U.S. consumer prices increased by the most in five months in June amid higher costs for some goods, suggesting tariffs were starting to have an impact on inflation and potentially keeping the Federal Reserve on the sidelines until September.
end quote
In that article, we have this choice comment from Trump to consider, to wit:
Trump persisted on Tuesday, writing on his Truth Social media platform, “Consumer Prices LOW. Bring down the Fed Rate, NOW!!”
end quote
And seriously, people, when was last time Trump went shopping for consumer goods?
And then we go to a Reuters article titled “Fed’s inflation fears start to be realized with June CPI increase” by Howard Schneider on July 15, 2025, where we learn as follows about the inflation Trump’s delusional treasury secretary Scott Bessent is not happening, to wit:
WASHINGTON, July 15 (Reuters) – Rising prices across an array of goods from coffee to audio equipment to home furnishings pulled inflation higher in June in what economists see as evidence of the Trump administration’s increasing import taxes passing through to consumers.
“Today’s report showed that tariffs are beginning to bite,” said Omair Sharif, head of Inflation Insights, “apparel prices rose, household furnishing prices jumped … and recreation commodities increased.”
Those are heavily imported items and the increases were substantial.
Prices for audio-video equipment rose 1.1% over the month and have risen 11.1% on a year over year basis, the largest jump ever in a category where globalization had generally meant steady or falling prices.
Yields on U.S. Treasury securities rose to their highest in about a month, and interest rate futures reflected growing uncertainty that the Fed would resume rate cuts in September, with a model from CME group showing that decision was seen a near toss-up after being the baseline expectation for the past month or so.
end quotes
And if we scroll down through that news article, we come to this bit of inanity from white house mouthpiece and head cheerleader Karoline Claire Leavitt, to wit:
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said the fact that core inflation, which excludes food and energy prices, increased less than expected, “proves that President Trump is stabilizing inflation.”
end quote
Uh, yeah, okay, Karoline, whatever it is you say, because you are Trump’s chief propagandist which means you must always be right, especially when you are dead wrong and don’t have a clue as to what you are talking about.
People, if you are concerned about your future, and that of your family and nation, the very last person in the world you want to be listening to and taking any kind of advice from about anything would be white house mouthpiece Karoline Claire Leavitt.
And that for the moment is the news!