Загрузка видео...
Не удалось загрузить видео
🧵 George Stephanopoulos EXPOSED – Economic Illiteracy or Willful Deception? George’s interview with The White House Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett shows what happens when a partisan activist pretends to be a journalist. Let’s break it down—with facts, figures, and TRUTH. 1 George’s Claim: “Tariffs are a tax on... show more
123,045 просмотров • 1 год назад •via X (Twitter)
Комментарии: 11
@FirstAmend75255 @WhiteHouse Stephanopoulos is an idiot and has always been an idiot. He is only where he is because of Bill Clinton, which is shameful in and of itself. You did a fabulous breakdown Francois.
@WhiteHouse When ABC hired the former Clinton White Communications Director, it's perceived political news neutrality switched to off position
@WhiteHouse Facts Francois! 🙌🏻Georgie has never been about facts… only the smear against Trump! He’s a partisan hack who I recall was forced to apologize to Trump for defamation as well as ABC paid &15 million in that lawsuit!
Scott Jennings leaves liberals STUNNED when he drops a nuclear bomb on the Biden "legacy."
@WhiteHouse This! Democrat Palace Guard!
@WhiteHouse 👍👍👍
@WhiteHouse Facts!
@WhiteHouse How is this guy still employed? Why do Trump guys go on this show?
@WhiteHouse That's an easy question to answer - We know President Trump is on the side of the American people - All American people - Now he has to help rebuild the middle class and create good paying jobs - When manufacturing comes back, we will prosper like never before.
The MSM is openly arguing to spin the "approved" narrative and trying to speak fear porn. It is despicable and totally in character. Fortunately Trumps people are experts and answer with substance as to how wrong they are. Tariffs are a tax that the selling company pays. If they try to add that to the price of the goods, the consumer doesn't have to buy it and won't. They then lower the price to where it will sell. Or consumers buy it from and American company. Get it? No more free ride using slave labor for China. China needs America to buy their goods and they will set prices that people will be good with. Or they move the factories here and jobs are created.
@PURE_BL00D2 @WhiteHouse Georgie—small stature.. Smaller brain=economic illiterate
![ABC News’ Jonathan Karl: “How does [Trump] respond that the Supreme Court says the tariffs, the reciprocal tariffs are unconstitutional?” Scott Jennings: “He’ll be apoplectic because the president believes that the tariff strategy is working. Look at GDP growth. Look at the stock market. Inflation is coming down. Growth’s going up. He thinks — and Bessent, you talk to Bessent, he thinks we’re going to have a boom in 2026 because of the long-term reengineering of the U.S. economy they’ve employed, largely on the back of tariffs. But he’ll be apoplectic.” “And, of course, it would also depend on whether the court rules that you have to give the money back that’s come in.” “How you ever untangle all that, I don't know. The president would also tell you, it's not just an economic tool. It's a diplomatic tool. He thinks a lot of the conflicts that he solved this year, which he’s very proud of, some of it, maybe more than half of them, were because he had the power to threaten these people with tariffs. And so, he thinks it will make the country weak, the presidency weaker and that it will sort of destabilize what he’s trying to do with the U.S. economy.”](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2005345016445550683/amplify_video_thumb/2005344822756814849/img/AoxIjQLkWdy940xm.jpg)
![Barry Sternlicht recently gave a VERY insightful interview about tariffs and what it means for real estate prices - what he said is troubling: "The promotion of American manufacturing is a great idea, but we are not a manufacturing nation... We only have 13 million jobs of 160 million in manufacturing, and we're running a 4% unemployment rate. So I'm not sure who's going to work in all these factories. We're going to need some really quick efforts from Musk and Zuckerberg in robotics to actually build, have people work in these factories. Americans don't want to do that. That's not the jobs that they're interested in taking today... I think the tariffs are super complicated... I do think the focus should be on China. We run a $250 billion trade deficit with China... China is [the] second largest economy in the world with a fixed currency. And that alone is not right. That currency should go up and down with trade flows like every other major currency. So you start there. And I don't think the tariffs are tactical. And the if you put them in place, as [Trump] just did with steel tariffs, American companies will raise prices. So it is very inflationary. And for real estate, it's really bad. [For example] we need [Canada's] lumber. Or we can chop down our own trees but it's a bad thing. We run an equal trade deficit with Canada other than oil but we use their oil... if we don't buy it, they're going to ship it to Asia. For existing owners [of real estate], it's good because to build a new building will be more expensive. So the existing office stock, the existing apartment stock is going to be worth more. But it's bad because the numbers won't work to create new [buildings]. You won't be able to build anything. We already have a four to five million unit housing shortage... And you're seeing it in the sentiment of the builders that they're nervous. Everyone's a little nervous."](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1911554042742145505/amplify_video_thumb/1911553788067876864/img/e1ax0AoKoQBdJMBl.jpg)
![This is absolutely fascinating: Jason Furman, one of the foremost economists in the U.S. and former chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, explains why the so-called "China shock" is a myth. According to him, "85 to 95% of Americans benefited" from trade with China, and "China has been part of helping [the US economy] work, not hurting it work." In other words, the narrative that China "stole" American jobs and wages is the exact opposite of reality. Furman's logic is pretty ironclad: 1) He points out, which is factual, that "the slowdown of wage growth and the rise of inequality began in the 1970s, when there basically was no trade with China." It then accelerated in the 1980s-90s when China trade was small, and **slowed down** after 2000. And "since about 2013," when trade with China was at its highest, "we've had pretty fast real wage growth," with "the fastest real wage growth for moderate income households." In other words, the timing doesn't fit: if China was the cause, the problem should have gotten worse as trade with China increased. Instead, it got better. 2) A common narrative one hears about China is "who cares about affordable goods, we need well-paying jobs." But Furman points out it's actually one and the same thing: "the way we measure jobs is how much your wages can buy. If you improve purchasing power, you are making every single job in the economy better." In very concrete terms, if salaries stay flat but Chinese imports make goods 10% cheaper, your purchasing power just went up 10%, as if you got a 10% wage hike. This makes every single job in the economy better. In effect "jobs vs. cheap goods" is a false dichotomy: cheap goods ARE better jobs. 3) Furman also points out, rightly, that the majority of what U.S. imports from China isn't consumer goods: "more than half of what we import is actually inputs into the manufacturing process itself." In other words, Chinese imports make U.S. manufacturing MORE competitive as it decreases their input costs. If you were to cut all Chinese imports, you'd cripple U.S. manufacturing as it would no longer be able to compete on price with anyone. And, as per point 2 above, you'd also destroy Americans' purchasing power, making every single U.S. worker worse off. 4) Last but not least, Furman says that the "China shock" literature is fundamentally flawed, as it "doesn't answer the most important question, which is what the net effect was." It "doesn't consider other causes for the job losses, doesn't look at all the places that gained jobs and wages, and doesn't integrate the consumer side." All in all, he believes that if one were to actually calculate the net effect of trade with China on the U.S. economy, it'd show that "85 to 95% of Americans benefited." And even for the 5-15% who lost out, Furman says these people were failed by "our labor policies, our social safety net" - not by China. What Furman is saying is more relevant than ever because, both in the U.S. and in Europe, this notion that China is somehow "stealing" Western jobs and prosperity has become the unquestioned premise of so many of today's policies. Nobody even debates it anymore, it's almost universally assumed correct. In my own country France, Macron keeps repeating it all the time, leading the charge in Europe to slap tariffs on Chinese imports, warning that China is "killing its own customers" and that it's a question of life or death for European industry ( He literally called last week for the EU to build its own version of America's Section 301 - the same protectionist tool Trump uses ( BUT, if Furman is right, and the data strongly suggests he is, France and Europe are about to inflict economic self-harm in the name of a problem that doesn't exist. Much more affordable cars, for instance, would literally give every single European a big wage hike. It's Furman's argument on "85 to 95% benefiting" vs 5% to 15% losing out: the vast majority of Europeans would see their money go further, while a small number of jobs in legacy automakers would be disrupted. Instead of helping those workers transition, Europe wants to prevent making everyone better off. Anyhow, please do watch the whole podcast, which has many other fascinating insights because Furman also debates with Justin Yifu Lin, the former Chief Economist of the World Bank and State Council Counsellor of China. They're both interviewed by my friend Hansong Li - also a professor and an immensely smart man - in his excellent new podcast "worldviews" (imho one of the best new podcasts our there). The video is here:](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2059814198545371491/amplify_video_thumb/2059799973081071616/img/jAdf0cZy7mcA9rCu.jpg)
