I think Trump may be attempting to throw the world into a depression so his oligarchic and kleptocratic buddies can buy up lots of stuff at huge discounts.
I used a spare email address to register with the FT, copy paste GillianTetts article and ask free top AI Chatbots for criticisms and more.
Capital flight caps from international agreements anyone?
Here's the last conclusion in a multipolar context and then the open doc link
" Trumpian approach to a multipolar world appears to be shifting toward economic nationalism, with potential tariffs on capital inflows as a tool to reshape global finance. While this could provide short-term leverage, the long-term risks—such as capital flight, financial instability, and weakening the dollar’s dominance—are significant. A more balanced strategy may involve selective industrial policy, strategic alliances, and financial innovation rather than outright capital restrictions.”
Thank you for your thoughtful reply. Ending the USD (we see it's increasing decline) as "the" reserve currency makes sense to me with flexible regional replacements who values are based on independent world opinion to human rights progress. I am sure AI can already help that now with the forecast few years until almost free genius immensely important for education to it's potential pros and cons
I mostly used the now almost outdated Chinese (spy) DeepSeek R1 and think venture capitalists own lots of ChatGPT after Microsoft's 49%.
From the open doc and DeepSeek "Critique of Gillian Tett’s Article on US Trade Tariffs and Capital Inflows**
24 2.2025
**1. Clarity and Structure:**
The article introduces a compelling premise—exploring whether tariffs on goods could lead to capital flow restrictions—but struggles with structural coherence. While the opening effectively frames market uncertainty, subsequent sections delve into disparate ideas (e.g., debt restructuring, sovereign wealth funds) without clear transitions. Concepts like the Plaza Accord or “perpetual bonds” are mentioned but inadequately explained, risking alienating readers unfamiliar with financial jargon. A more streamlined narrative with contextual explanations would enhance accessibility.
**2. Evidence and Sources:**
Tett draws on credible but niche sources, such as Michael Pettis’s heterodox theories and the Baldwin-Hawley bill. However, critical claims lack robust substantiation. For instance, the $2tn revenue estimate from capital inflow taxes (cited via American Compass) is presented without scrutiny of its methodology or feasibility. Similarly, speculative policies like the “Mar-a-Lago accord” are discussed without concrete evidence of political backing, leaning heavily on conjecture. Including historical precedents (e.g., past capital controls) could strengthen the analysis.
**3. Balance and Counterarguments:**
While the article acknowledges mainstream economists’ skepticism toward Pettis’s ideas, it does not deeply engage with their critiques. For example, why ...
The money behind project 2025 and the new reactionaries from Silicon Valley publicly has to plan 2022, which laid out the steps they intended to work through in order to dismantle the United States. This is not me figurative sense at all. It's meant to mean that the United States ceases to be a nation the federal government ceases to exist.
Whether some faction within the conservative circles can actually forward the plan of managing capital flows it's quite distinct from the tidal forces in play.
Without any hyperbole, a war is being wage by obscene wealth on the US public through the White House. The population brought into total subjugation or killed off by the very wealthiest, economic strata in the United States will make much of this discussion, largely irrelevant.
As always, thanks for your insights Ann. It's often hard to make sense of Trump's erratic actions. Is he genuinely interested in helping American workers, or is his ultimate loyalty to fellow billionaires? Your take here suggests the former, at least in this case. What do you make of his threats to take over Canada or Greenland?
And most importantly, when will we get to read the new book?
He wants the USD to remain the world’s reserve currency, with all the benefits that brings (more stable inflation, market intelligence, ability to influence through the USD-based global financial architecture).
But he feels the USD is OVERVALUED (!) and would like it to decline to help mitigate the negative trade account. Tariffs is one of his mechanisms to achieve this.
To say he wants a strong USD is to ignore his own manifesto.
I think Trump may be attempting to throw the world into a depression so his oligarchic and kleptocratic buddies can buy up lots of stuff at huge discounts.
I used a spare email address to register with the FT, copy paste GillianTetts article and ask free top AI Chatbots for criticisms and more.
Capital flight caps from international agreements anyone?
Here's the last conclusion in a multipolar context and then the open doc link
" Trumpian approach to a multipolar world appears to be shifting toward economic nationalism, with potential tariffs on capital inflows as a tool to reshape global finance. While this could provide short-term leverage, the long-term risks—such as capital flight, financial instability, and weakening the dollar’s dominance—are significant. A more balanced strategy may involve selective industrial policy, strategic alliances, and financial innovation rather than outright capital restrictions.”
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1FZjt6upiQ_FE72AYvjKv-77ZPYmYo9jNz7SpLzO0qKg/edit?usp=drivesdk
That is fine if the ’threat’ ‘weakening the dollar’s dominance’ is a significant, long-term risk…
Also there are choices: financialised globalisation, nationalism, autarky, sovereignty and policy autonomy…Take your pick..
And btw…I think AI/Chat GBT must be biased in favour of Wall Street, knowing its makers....
Thank you for your thoughtful reply. Ending the USD (we see it's increasing decline) as "the" reserve currency makes sense to me with flexible regional replacements who values are based on independent world opinion to human rights progress. I am sure AI can already help that now with the forecast few years until almost free genius immensely important for education to it's potential pros and cons
I mostly used the now almost outdated Chinese (spy) DeepSeek R1 and think venture capitalists own lots of ChatGPT after Microsoft's 49%.
From the open doc and DeepSeek "Critique of Gillian Tett’s Article on US Trade Tariffs and Capital Inflows**
24 2.2025
**1. Clarity and Structure:**
The article introduces a compelling premise—exploring whether tariffs on goods could lead to capital flow restrictions—but struggles with structural coherence. While the opening effectively frames market uncertainty, subsequent sections delve into disparate ideas (e.g., debt restructuring, sovereign wealth funds) without clear transitions. Concepts like the Plaza Accord or “perpetual bonds” are mentioned but inadequately explained, risking alienating readers unfamiliar with financial jargon. A more streamlined narrative with contextual explanations would enhance accessibility.
**2. Evidence and Sources:**
Tett draws on credible but niche sources, such as Michael Pettis’s heterodox theories and the Baldwin-Hawley bill. However, critical claims lack robust substantiation. For instance, the $2tn revenue estimate from capital inflow taxes (cited via American Compass) is presented without scrutiny of its methodology or feasibility. Similarly, speculative policies like the “Mar-a-Lago accord” are discussed without concrete evidence of political backing, leaning heavily on conjecture. Including historical precedents (e.g., past capital controls) could strengthen the analysis.
**3. Balance and Counterarguments:**
While the article acknowledges mainstream economists’ skepticism toward Pettis’s ideas, it does not deeply engage with their critiques. For example, why ...
The money behind project 2025 and the new reactionaries from Silicon Valley publicly has to plan 2022, which laid out the steps they intended to work through in order to dismantle the United States. This is not me figurative sense at all. It's meant to mean that the United States ceases to be a nation the federal government ceases to exist.
Whether some faction within the conservative circles can actually forward the plan of managing capital flows it's quite distinct from the tidal forces in play.
Without any hyperbole, a war is being wage by obscene wealth on the US public through the White House. The population brought into total subjugation or killed off by the very wealthiest, economic strata in the United States will make much of this discussion, largely irrelevant.
:/
As always, thanks for your insights Ann. It's often hard to make sense of Trump's erratic actions. Is he genuinely interested in helping American workers, or is his ultimate loyalty to fellow billionaires? Your take here suggests the former, at least in this case. What do you make of his threats to take over Canada or Greenland?
And most importantly, when will we get to read the new book?
Ann, I'm repeating a plea I made to you in, I think, 2018, at a talk by Rachel Reeves. Please include an Index in your new book!
I hereby stake my right to the Wikipedia entry: “The Pettis Rugpull”.
https://x.com/tedcruz/status/1901646958806049204
https://open.substack.com/pub/stephaniekelton/p/elon-musk-discovers-the-magic-of?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=57m629
Trumps AGENDA47 calls for two contrary things.
He wants the USD to remain the world’s reserve currency, with all the benefits that brings (more stable inflation, market intelligence, ability to influence through the USD-based global financial architecture).
But he feels the USD is OVERVALUED (!) and would like it to decline to help mitigate the negative trade account. Tariffs is one of his mechanisms to achieve this.
To say he wants a strong USD is to ignore his own manifesto.
Malaysia under Mahathir successfully deployed capital controls (against central bank advice) during the Asian currency crisis of the late 1990s