Post

"this would be really bad and so, ipso facto, it can't happen" is the assumption underlying the entire Trump era and it's sort of bleakly funny to see people clinging to it even as the train is jumping the tracks

This post is unavailable.

525 reposts2.8K likes

This kind of thinking is rife in economics. When I was a student I was assigned an apparently serious article that assured us that new technologies will *always* arise to address resource shortages. Like getting gold from sea water! Something does have to give but it might not be what you expect.

We've already seen the collapse of "This would be really bad and so, ipso facto, people in power will try to prevent it" and now we're in a situation where even if they DID try it might be too late! Maybe factor that into the model, as a treat?

Unfortunately this has been the preferred assumption for all of human history. The ancient Egyptian Old Kingdom fell because a hundred-year-old Pharaoh couldn't cope with climate change and kept assuming the Nile would flood on schedule, leading to widespread famine and collapse when it didn't.

I hate how much ancient Egypt is a guide to understanding the moment, but the absolute ruler and cult leader desired by the Republicans is basically a Pharaoh, and Trump is a mix of Pepy II (old, senile, incompetent) and Akhenaten (narcissistic, daddy issues, delusions of godhood, deeply weird).

"We can just push boats through, what are they going to do, hit us with rockets and drones launched from Iranian soil? That would be silly they are nowhere near the strait."

I got into a ferocious argument with my brother when I warned him Trump was screwing up the National Weather Service. My brother said "No one would do that, that would be stupid!" Greedy people will wreck all sorts of stuff for money. Like people pulling wiring out of buildings to sell metals.

Is this the same JP Morgan that said US refineries will be forced to reduce their gasoline production in September so they can produce more jet fuel?

Analysts: This would be really bad and nobody wants this, so it won't happen Trump: When I say 'Sea', you hear 'See'. A lot of people don't know there are words that sound the same but are spelled different. A big strong dictionary came up to me and said "Sir, we need you to make a word for that."

All I know is I’m getting hit hard in the current economy, extremely ready for it to be worse if it means that Trump is a generational pariah known only for a racist legacy of his tiny swollen hands turning the country into scam central and everything else to shit… …so imagine how the Iranians feel

The market believes that a full-scale assault on Iran's energy infrastructure (which is a war crime) would quickly compel their full surrender. I honestly can't say for sure they're wrong but it really feels like we're gonna find out.

“This would be really bad because the markets would melt down, so it can’t happen. Therefore the markets shouldn’t melt down” The more the market pretends nothing is wrong, the less likely Trump folds and the more likely the meltdown is sudden and catastrophic.

Yeah, if the oil price had hit 200USD/bbl in March, we would have seen much more conservation and new drilling. But apparently that couldn't be allowed, so now Trump is pushing the crash as close to the midterms as possible lol.

"drones aren't real" I assure myself as I close my eyes and pilot my tanker into the strait of hormuz

Analysts all agree that starting a war with Iran that would impede traffic through the Strait would be catastrophic for the global economy, and the line would stop going up, therefore the Trump regime will make sure that war never starts. It's just facts, Micah.

That's assuming a moron like Trump ever got elected for a second term, which as we know from past data would also stop the line going up, so it can't and won't ever happen.

You have to agree that any sane Secretary of Defense would insist that the US military could not stop Iran from closing the Strait without a massive ground invasion. And any sane President would therefore not start a war.This is not rocket science, people!

"one way or another" is really the key to this nonsense there's one way! the way is iran deciding the strait is open again, it's extremely clear at this point that this is not something that can be forced militarily there simply is no "another" no matter how hard you wishcast it

we're more likely to experience a coup here than the world's most vain and petty man in history deciding to eat a giant bowl of shit and take the enormous L that is waiting at the end of this

"One way or another" sure sounds like they know Trump has set an early June invasion date. I'm sure Iran hasn't spent the last two months digging trenches and installing mines all along the coastline and pressuring mideast allies to not assist a US invasion.

fwiw folks who know stuff are basically reading this as JPM doomposting and saying "price shocks are going to force Trump to give Iran whatever they want to reopen the strait by some time in June" I'm less convinced that's going to happen but it's a less ridiculous theory

ESG Hound@esghound.com

Correct, this is just a summary of Marko Kolanovic (former JPM macro) posts on twitter. He's been doom posting for weeks. Some people in finance are willfully dumb chuds but you should never assume that they are all mouthbreathers or w/e

"price changes behaviors, and 250 dollar crude is a market catastrophe that can't be jawboned" is all it should be read as.

Not sure if Trump giving in to Iranian demands is actually a viable way out. I don’t think Trump can actually deliver on what they want.

The thing is worry about is the oil shocks happen, Trump initially backs down, then the Iranians post "We won, suck it Trump you tiny dicked loser" on Twitter and he rips up the deal.

Like existentially cannot accept a politically re-consolidated and more militant Iran holding yellowcake. The Gulf State Monarchies can't tolerate handing control of the strait to Iran. It doesnt matter to them that it will make number go up better in the short term to just allow that.

The stupid thing here is that everything about this incentivises Iran ( and pretty much every other non-US non-nuclear power ) to want nukes more. If nukes are the only reliable way to stop the US being a weird belligerent....

The only thing that stops the United States from invading a country is nuclear weapons. Therefore, if you don't want to be pillaged at a whim it behooves anyone who doesn't trust America to build one