Donald Trump has promised a 10% tariff across the board for all goods entering the United States if elected. This market will settle as YES if Donald Trump gets elected and in any one quarter of 2025, the US weighted average tariff is at least 6%. For the last quarter we have data at this time, second quarter of 2024, the number was 2.4%. It was at 3.5% at its highest level of the Trump presidency.
Data is sourced from the Federal Reserve Economic Data website (link below). This market will settle as soon as Callum Williams, senior economics writer at The Economist, has calculated the number has crossed the 6% threshold for any quarter in 2025, or it hasn’t for any of the quarters. If, when he does his calculations for the fourth quarter of 2025, the 6% threshold has not been met, this market will then settle NO. This market will settle as YES if either an initial estimate or any revision for any of the first three quarters of 2025 crosses the 6% threshold while the market is open. The fourth quarter number will be based on initial data and the market will close after that data is available at the latest.
If Donald Trump loses the election, this market will settle as N/A. If Donald Trump wins the election but a different president takes office at any point, this market will settle according to the same rules based on the US weighted tariff average for each quarter.
If Callum Williams is unavailable to conduct the analysis, a suitable replacement will be found.
See data here: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/graph/?g=1wn5e
Callum Williams on X: https://x.com/econcallum
The distinction between lying and bullshitting is fairly clear. The liar asserts something which he himself believes to be false. He deliberately misrepresents what he takes to be the truth. The bullshitter, on the other hand, is not constrained by any consideration of what may or may not be true. In making his assertion, he is indifferent to whether what he is says is true or false. His goal is not to report facts. It is, rather, to shape the beliefs and attitudes of his listeners in a certain way.
@ScottSupak Wow, what a profound misunderstanding of Trump's rhetorical style (I might even label that article "bullshit"). The term "truthful hyperbole" was coined in Art of the Deal and is a much better (partial) model of Trump's exaggerations and "lies".
@AlQuinn The article is from Harry Frankfurt, a prominent philosopher, as opposed to a bullshitting con artist who says things that may or may not be true depending on what he thinks you need to hear at the time.
@ScottSupak Hey, I liked On Bullshit but his take on Trump is so bad. I see the article is from 2016. I would have agreed with him then but I've moved on to better models of the world.
@AlQuinn lol, whatever. Not interested in discussing your love for a bullshitter. Point is you can never be sure he'll do what he says because everything he says is bullshit designed to shape perceptions, not relay facts.
@ScottSupak I didn't claim any love for Trump, but it's interesting you suggested that. It's as if trying to understand Trumpism is itself a thoughtcrime -- no we can't do that because it might legitimize a narrative not endorsed by The Blob!
Isn't "shaping perceptions" the entire point of language? Calling it all "bullshit" in the case of Trump is an oversimplification.
@AlQuinn I think there are two major views of trumpism,
1)He is an malicious moron who knows nothing only knows how to own the libs, and failed to overthrow the government due to lack of intelligence. i.e. a dumb Conman who only cares about his short term interests, not a man of ideas.
2) He's playing 5-D chess trying to shift the overton window by what seems like bullshit for his promised ideas and he is might be malicious in certain ways but his ideas are brought to moderation by the checks and balances. i.e. He knows exactly what he's doing.
I think both of them have little bit of truth to them but I tend to lean towards the former because to me the latter seems like a consequence of former, although I do think he has been consistent on isolationism so he does have some ideas. As hanania put it "Politics is full of bad people who more often than not do good things".
@makeworld don't think there's any particular reason to believe that these two markets can be arbed in any way
@makeworld you literally only linked that because you're the creator of that market and you're shilling it. Obviously if Trump DOESN'T impose tariffs on Canada, then that lowers the odds of the weighted average tariff being above 6%. However, apart from that there is very little connection between these two markets. Certainly it's not intuitive that one should be higher or lower than the other.
Regardless, unless you have no clue what the term "arbitrage" means, it doesn't apply to this situation at all. I suggest looking up what it means to arbitrage two markets.
@AlQuinn So one of the anonymous sources then. Does this man appear to be eminently trustable to you?
@TiredCliche maybe, how would we know if the first source was anonymous? anyway no one is denying anything reported regarding the meeting
@gallerdude He will probably try, but I’d imagine anything that most likely violates the USMCA Implementation Act would be enjoined pending the outcome of litigation (and there will be litigation).
@ChadCotty I thought he could still implement tariffs for up to 150 days under emergency economic powers act