foregoneconclusion
About
- Username
- foregoneconclusion
- Joined
- Visits
- 254
- Last Active
- Roles
- member
- Points
- 10,807
- Badges
- 2
- Posts
- 3,056
Reactions
-
Apple exempt from 100% semiconductor tariffs, thanks to its $100B U.S. investment
-
Tim Cook will be at the White House for US investment announcement
Kuminga said: Jerome Powell needs to lower rates , 2 year treasury rate says he is already way late again . Remember “inflation is transitory”?
https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/investing/inflation
-
Trump claims TSMC will invest $300 billion in Arizona, pledges semiconductor tariff
The Trump administration has already reached the point where they announce "deals" to the press that have never been made.
Here's the NYT reporting that the U.S. has a "deal" with South Korea.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/30/business/economy/trump-tariffs-south-korea.html
And here's Reuters reporting two days later that South Korea says there is no "deal".
https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/south-korea-says-it-has-no-written-pact-us-trade-deal-2025-08-01/
-
Tim Cook: We spent on AI companies in the quarter, but nobody big
-
Apple's Epic gamble: birthright citizenship ruling cited to overturn antisteering mandate
One of the Supreme Court's more goofball rulings that ignores over 100 years of legal precedent. SC itself issued the first nationwide injunction back in the early 20th century and federal courts began issuing them a couple of years after that. Class action status was NEVER a requirement. So the 2025 SC is basically claiming that ONLY the SC has the authority to issue nationwide injunctions without class action status despite the fact that nationwide injunctions were never used by ANY court in the U.S. prior to the early 20th century. Quite the convenient timeline cherry-picking by the SC and it completely ignores what "federal" actually means when it comes to the court system.