Pollingis showing Americans are feeling very bullish right now on the economy.
Hope you enjoy your large tax return and lower withholdings in your current pay checks.
Economics Thread
- Thread starter sturg33
- Start date
Pollingis showing Americans are feeling very bullish right now on the economy.
Hope you enjoy your large tax return and lower withholdings in your current pay checks.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
Iran was bombed a few days ago, all these changes to important markets happened basically overnight, polls released yesterday were likely sampled in February at the earliest
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
I know not many here are probably as in tune with the entertainment industry market, but this is fucking terrible
I don't understand how Paramount's board OK'd the purchase sidling them with hundreds of billions of debt to acquire a company that has a ton of IP, but not thath much. I'ts not Disney or Nintendo. It's Looney Tunes and DC and that's about it.
I don't understand how Paramount's board OK'd the purchase sidling them with hundreds of billions of debt to acquire a company that has a ton of IP, but not thath much. I'ts not Disney or Nintendo. It's Looney Tunes and DC and that's about it.
Game of Thrones, Harry Potter, LOTR
acesfull86
Well-known member
Not sending their best
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
THey don't own LotR IP. They own the films. The IP is still owned by Tolkien estate which is why Amazon got Rings of Power.
Game of Thrones isn't a massive IP, maybe it gets there. But no one is buying GoT toys and playing GoT Video Games.
WB only has film, game, tv, and merch rights for Harry Potter, not charaacter rights. But JK Controls books and characters.
Never said they owned the IPs, but they do own the current rights to make shows etc on them.
The Harry Potter series is already being remade.
GoT franchise already found a hit with Knight.
LOTR is getting remade again.
So there is some value to exploit but maybe not 100 billion.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
Remaking LotR is going to be cancer, there's no way any sane person could OK it when the OT is 25.
The Harry Potter series just finished 15 years ago.
And is also 25-26.
And we're getting a full GoT invested Tv series in to it.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
That's one thing I guess. I mean I suspect the Harry Potter thing doesn't make as much money as they think because I think a lot of people either don't care anymroe and those who loved the OG don't really want to keep lining the pockets of JK.
acesfull86
Well-known member
https://www.theunseenandtheunsaid.com/p/what-history-tells-us-about-tariffs
Using these 21 exogenous tariff events as a statistical instrument (a way of isolating genuine policy-driven variation from noise), den Besten and Känzig estimate how the U.S. economy responds to a tariff shock. Their benchmark is a one-percentage-point increase in the average tariff rate on dutiable imports.
In the authors’ model, the first economic response to tariffs is that imports fall sharply, about 4% on impact, which is precisely what tariffs are designed to do. But the story doesn’t stop there. Exports, after a brief pause, also decline, falling roughly 2% at their trough. The exchange rate appreciates as import demand contracts, which erodes the competitiveness of American goods abroad. Trading partners also retaliate and adjust their own sourcing. The result is a broad contraction in trade on both sides of the ledger, as shown in the authors’ figure below.
Most striking is what happens to domestic production. A one-percentage-point tariff increase leads to a peak decline in real GDP of around 0.9%, a large and persistent effect that continues for at least 8 years after the shock. Manufacturing output, the sector tariffs are most often designed to protect, falls by more than 1.5% at its peak. Real wages for manufacturing workers also decline.
In other words, tariffs do not succeed in their stated goal of shielding American industry. The general-equilibrium effects—higher input costs, a stronger dollar, weaker exports, reduced foreign demand—more than offset whatever protection individual sectors might receive.
This may also largely explain why employment in the manufacturing sector was more than 100,000 jobs below pre-election trends by the end of 2025.
…
Nearly two centuries of American history, carefully read, tell a consistent story. Tariffs may feel like protection. But the data suggest they function more like a tax, one whose costs are borne most heavily by the economy they were meant to defend.
Using these 21 exogenous tariff events as a statistical instrument (a way of isolating genuine policy-driven variation from noise), den Besten and Känzig estimate how the U.S. economy responds to a tariff shock. Their benchmark is a one-percentage-point increase in the average tariff rate on dutiable imports.
In the authors’ model, the first economic response to tariffs is that imports fall sharply, about 4% on impact, which is precisely what tariffs are designed to do. But the story doesn’t stop there. Exports, after a brief pause, also decline, falling roughly 2% at their trough. The exchange rate appreciates as import demand contracts, which erodes the competitiveness of American goods abroad. Trading partners also retaliate and adjust their own sourcing. The result is a broad contraction in trade on both sides of the ledger, as shown in the authors’ figure below.
Most striking is what happens to domestic production. A one-percentage-point tariff increase leads to a peak decline in real GDP of around 0.9%, a large and persistent effect that continues for at least 8 years after the shock. Manufacturing output, the sector tariffs are most often designed to protect, falls by more than 1.5% at its peak. Real wages for manufacturing workers also decline.
In other words, tariffs do not succeed in their stated goal of shielding American industry. The general-equilibrium effects—higher input costs, a stronger dollar, weaker exports, reduced foreign demand—more than offset whatever protection individual sectors might receive.
This may also largely explain why employment in the manufacturing sector was more than 100,000 jobs below pre-election trends by the end of 2025.
…
Nearly two centuries of American history, carefully read, tell a consistent story. Tariffs may feel like protection. But the data suggest they function more like a tax, one whose costs are borne most heavily by the economy they were meant to defend.