• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Trump administration 2024-2028

brihard said:
Gotta watch the base rate fallacy on that one. Trade has been such an utter gong show that month by month just doesn’t help much.there have been wild swings as tariffs come and go, and as companies leverage windows of “we know the rules for the rest of this week” to lay in inventories.

US imports are little changed if you look at a smoothed out 3-5 year, and exports have continued to grow modestly but at apparently the same or a similar rate to before.

Interestingly the value of the U.S. dollar as measured by the DXY currency basket index is down about 11% in the past year. It’s even now showing a slip against the Canadian dollar, which til recently had been sliding with it but is now gaining in relative value. Our dollar is up 6.5% in the past 12 months against USD.

I have no feel for if the U.S. is deliberately weakening their own dollar to discourage imports and encourage exports.
Click to expand...
I've been wondering the same thing about their lowering their dollar but I'm not sure that they (Trump & Admin) fully grasp that they are playing with a wicked fire called inflation that has the ability to kneecap them, coupled with the rising costs of imports.

Here's a decent explanation of what Morgan Stanley identified back in Aug about this issue, and, since then, the USD has fallen further.


Key Takeaways from the article:

  • The value of the U.S. dollar against other currencies dropped about 11% in the first half of this year, the biggest decline in more than 50 years, ending a 15-year bull cycle.
  • Morgan Stanley Research estimates the U.S. currency could lose another 10% by the end of 2026.
  • Despite a recovery of 3.2% in July, the delayed impact of tariffs on growth and unemployment – besides policy uncertainties – are likely to keep negative pressure on the dollar.
  • Foreign investors have been adding hedges to their exposure to U.S. assets, which will likely further weaken the dollar.
EDIT:

Adding a link on the US Interest Expense and Interest Rates info page. The US will pay over 1$ TRILLION USD on just the interest on their Federal Debt this year. That works out to be roughly 3.2% of their GDP. In terms of Federal government spending - in5 years interest on the debt will account for 15.6% of Federal expenses....


To give a comparison with us.....total Federal & Provincial interest costs (the US numbers don't include state debt, which typically is substantially lower than Provincial debt), are just over 85$ billion CAD a yearly - using a factor of 9 for population differences, it works out to be about 765$ billion a year in interest payments. In terms of a GDP ratio, by 2029 ours will be about 2.1% - 50% less than the US's now vs 3yrs into the future.
 
Last edited:
Retired AF Guy said:
The latest tantrum from President Trump.

www.flightglobal.com

Trump threatens to ‘de-certify’ thousands of Canadian-manufactured aircraft over Gulfstream dispute

Canadian-made aircraft have drawn the ire of US President Donald Trump, who is threatening to "de-certify" Canadian aircraft and levy a 50% tariff on those sold in the USA - unless Canada issues certifications for US-manufactured Gulfstream jets.
www.flightglobal.com www.flightglobal.com
Click to expand...
Delta,United and American Airlines among others in the US must be really thrilled by this prospect!🙄
 
Lumber said:
"Stepping back a bit, he added, "We're gonna make it easier to buy, we're gonna get interest rates down, but I wanna protect the people that, for the first time in their lives, feel good about themselves. They feel like, you know, that they're wealthy people."

Trump then circled back to his plan to increase housing costs: "There's so much talk about, 'Oh, we're gonna drive housing prices down.' I don't wanna drive housing prices down, I wanna drive housing prices up for people that own their homes, and they can be assured that's what's gonna happen."

people.com

Trump Says He Wants to 'Drive Housing Prices Up' Instead of Lowering Costs for People Who 'Didn't Work Very Hard'

President Donald Trump said during a Cabinet meeting that he wants to 'drive housing prices up' to keep homeowners 'wealthy' rather than focusing on affordability to benefit people people who 'didn't work very hard'
people.com people.com
Click to expand...
Spoken like a true real estate shyster. I assume his financial backers all own their houses and everybody else are just losers.
 
lenaitch said:
Spoken like a true real estate shyster. I assume his financial backers all own their houses and everybody else are just losers.
Click to expand...
The US needs to have lower interest rates, beyond the housing market. They are being buried, one grain of sand at a time, by the interest payments on their debt. The higher the rates, the higher the interest payments.
 
More to my last post. Noah over at his substack has an update on Trump's last tantrum and what its all abut. Apparently, the FAA has given approval for the latest Gulfstream biz jets and Transport Canada has not. However, the FAA gave Gulfstream a bye on some safety issues and TC has not.

The latest Tariff threat? Aircraft and Bombardier. Noah Note.

Noah
Jan 29, 2026

https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F37f153f8-46ba-4c2b-b9aa-aa122b8c90ba_1440x892.jpeg


Another night, another tariff threat. This time we're moving from our traditional sectors to take a jab at our humble Aerospace industry. At a time when one would think the United States might care a bit about keeping Aerospace out of the Canadian discussion, President Trump has decided to once again beat the tariff drum and decided to go after the Canadian Aerospace industry, and specifically yelling at Bombardier.

Of course for this administration the belief that threats can solve everything is ever present, so not a surprise at all. All this stems from a long-standing regulatory logjam at Transport Canada. While the FAA in the U.S. has moved forward with certifying the latest Gulfstream fleet, Canadian regulators have been more deliberate, or "steadfastly refused," in the President's phrasing, to grant the final stamp of approval.

Of course what's not mentioned here is that the FAA had granted ongoing safety exemptions to the latest Gulfstream to get them certified that run through this year. A lot of this discussion is regarding engine software, Fuel-Icing, and other electronic equipment but I could be missing a few. Honestly im not up to date on the topic.

In the meantime Bombardier and the Global family continue to increase their American market share. This is backed by several major investments, the exact same the president is so desperate to see, into their U.S. operations. This includes a brand-new, 46,000-square-foot component manufacturing facility in California last year, a new 64,500 sq. ft service center in Indiana, and the completion of their massive 300,000-square-foot service center in 2022. That's now the largest business aviation MRO (Maintenance, Repair, and Overhaul) facility in the U.S.

Bombardier, funny enough has been one of the more proactive major Canadian companies in investing in their American supply chain, yet still can't seem to escape the grasp of faux political interest. Never mind also that the United States military has also been a major supporter of Bombardier, with the Global airframe in use as both the E-11A and in the newer HADES. Again, irony.

Eventually this stuff gets a bit tiring. I expect Trump to back down again, especially as those with Bombardier aircraft among his circle hear the news. They don't seem to fond of Gulfstreams do they? However the constant threats, and now specifically going after our Aerospace industry make me feel more and more like debates on the F-35 are quickly moving to a breakoff conclusion.

It's hard to imagine the scenario that the Trump administration envisions. Threaten our Aerospace industry, bully us, and then tell us to buy your aircraft? Eventually people just say fuck it. They don't care. We were already very close to that, but the recent string of events feels like it's drawing us ever closer to a Swedish future.

There comes a point where platforms and capabilities take a back seat to political climate and downright exhaustion. Its tiring to have to watch this circus, to have to be in the middle. Eventually you just want to bite the bullet, because you know no matter whay the threats will keep coming, and they'll see you worse off if you do listen.

Anyways, I don't expect much to come of it, save more firm contracts for Bombardier. If you're Boeing or Lockheed you might be counting your losses by this end. Of course AEWC was always gonna be a mainly Bombardier show, given the Liberal promise for a Canadian-made aircraft.

Perhaps this will encourage the DIA to finally get inboard with me 20+ Global fleet with all my wanted variants. I think I could sell them.

Noah Note: This of course goes a lot wider than Bombardier. This also hits major suppliers like Bell and Dehavilland as well. Both of which hold significant shares of their markets as well.

The impact extends far beyond Bombardier. It threatens the entire North American aerospace corridor. This includes Bell’s commercial line, which produces the majority of their global helicopters in Quebec, and De Havilland’s Dash and CL families, which are critical for U.S. regional travel and wildfire suppression. Then you get into Airbus….

All of which would be hit by these proposed tariffs, and for what? To open up a new, already dominated market for the Gulfstream? It would seem so silly if it weren't so stupid.
Click to expand...

Link
 
As a friend of mine said: The only thing certifiable in this tiff is Trump.

My understanding at this point is that, of the four types of Gulfstream planes Trump mentioned in his post, two are already certified by Canada, one is in the process and nearing certification and the last one has only been provisionally certified by the FAA but not in Canada due to an issue with deicing system.

Well, if the US is willing to certify provisionally a plane with bad deicing because "the rich people who buy them don't go to cold places", that's fine with me (even though, I assume, some of these rich people must live in the Northern states o the US, and, I assume again, travel to and from their homes there - so why would they want to endanger their lives in a plane that doesn't do deicing properly?). In Canada, I would expect the certification authority to NOT certify a plane with deicing problems - neither as apolitical or illegal act - but as a matter of proper regulation and application thereof.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top