blastdoor

foregoneconclusion said:

blastdoor said: The Great Depression resulted in FDR

The general population of the U.S. was smarter at that time. The current population still hasn't figured out that an anti-regulatory party isn't going to improve economic outcomes for anyone except the rich. 

I think it's important to understand that's not actually right. My grandparents were young adults who voted for FDR and their schooling ended at 8th grade. They had a lot of prejudices and misconceptions about the world. They voted for FDR not because they were geniuses, but because the alternative was Hoover. 

The real difference -- and it's critically important to understand-- between then and now is that back then there was a system for selecting presidential candidates that was mostly run by elites, not the masses. Candidates were selected by party machines in the proverbial smoky back room. That process eliminated radical candidates and presented the populace with two mostly sane and reasonable, though still importantly different, choices. 

Our problem today is that the system for nominating candidates, especially (apparently) in the Republican Party, has broken down, and deeply flawed people are able to become nominees. 

Some wild guesses:

* M5 will have same CPU and GPU core counts with minor speed increases
* M5 will double the size/performance of the Neural Engine
* M5 pro/max/ultra will put the CPU + NE on one die and the GPU on another die
* People can mix/match pro/max/ultra CPU dies with pro/max/ultra GPU dies, so that you can customize whether you have a CPU-intensive, GPU-intensive, or both-intensive computer (but there would be limitations depending on the cooling capabilities of any given chassis) 

coolfactor said:

I hope we see some solid stats showing how many regret voting for this "President". So many families are in for a lot of hurt over the next four years because his stance on the US is not rooted in modern thought nor being inclusive.

The best data on that will come November 2026.

I wonder if there might be a sense in which China does partially pay for the tariffs indirectly, for two reasons. First, Trumps overall bundle of policies is likely to be inflationary, which leads to higher interest rates. Higher interest rates attract foreign investors which pushes the dollar higher. A stronger dollar makes imports less expensive. This feedback loop is a second order effect and by itself won’t offset the higher tariffs, but it’s a piece of the puzzle.

Another piece of the puzzle is that China isn’t a “normal” country, which is to say it doesn’t behave the way economics text books assume. The Chinese economy is deeply distorted and unbalanced by government policies. They have vastly over invested in housing and infrastructure. And the CCP dreads the political instability from mass unemployment. They also have a weird ideological opposition to domestic consumption.

So, to maintain employment and the stability of the regime, their choice could be between building yet another bridge to nowhere or selling manufactured goods abroad at a huge loss. That’s the pathway by which Trumps claim might be at least partly true. 

https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/taiwanese-govt-clears-tsmc-to-make-2nm-chips-abroad-country-lowers-its-silicon-shield