WWII

curlnut3_14

Hes referring to when the US provided aid to China during WWII to stop Japan from invading.

ConsiderationKey1658

Yes. WWII

OrdinaryWeekly7468

You say "legally" they can't do it.. but they're doing it regardless. Alligator Alcatraz gets shut down? They reopen the exact same type of facility in former internment camps used in WWII. Deploying the military into cities? They use the National Guard for now as test grounds, but to use that to sic the military on people later. To the extent that they can't do something legally (which they have wide latitude to do anyway because the law in the US is nothing if not fascist to begin with), they have workarounds until they can keep judges on a leash... which they're currently in the process of doing.

ScootieJr

A hedge fund investment manager has no business trying to tell businesses how to run... businesses. He graduated with a degree in political science and immediately went to work for the Soros Fund Management company. He is intentionally misusing tariffs, and wants to repeat history with the Smooth-Hawley Tariff Act, like how it worsened the great depression until WWII... They want to actively cause a world war, thinking that we would be able to manufacture and sell weapons like we did in WWII, which boosted our economy. Except this time around, it would only boost the Executives of manufacturer's pockets and won't help the general population at all. Every country is going to be against us in the next World War.

OrdinaryWeekly7468

"You're confusing political power with power" Right now, they're one-in-the-same. In the post-WWII era, we were getting closer to political power being derived from civic power. But it's not. It hasn't been that way since January 19th. This administration has pretty well recreated political power to be synonymous with executive capital-P power. Trump doesn't need his cult anymore in any significant way, except to feed his own ego. You're also under the impression that this is a Trump project, when it's a Republican project in general. For the last 3 or 4 decades, various anti-democratic (small-d) conservatives have been building the infrastructure for a total state take over and they've completed it. Vance was the guy that, low-key, the institutional Republicans wanted in the first place. Not because they control him necessarily, but because his agenda falls in line with theirs. They have been authoritarians. They wanted the increase in the security state. They wanted power concentrated in the executive and to have elections become just a background rubber stamp to give some thin air of legitimacy. All of the shit that Trump is doing right now, the Republicans have been clamoring for since at least Nixon. The lesson they walked away from with Nixon wasn't "Maybe we should play by the rules." It was, "We must change the rules for us." With Vance, we have the government contracting with private tech interests to build out, essentially, a Big Brother state. That is what Palantir is. That's what xAI is gearing up to be. The really far-right techno-fascist wing of the party comes from Vance and his connections. The country, as a sort of semi-democratic republic, has been dead. The question was either: are we reverting back to this neo-mercantilist hypernationalism that was popular in the 1800s and early 1900s (which is Trump's given path), or are we going into a techno-fascist nightmare of patchwork states (which is what Thiel, Musk and, so, Vance wants)?

Asleep-Strike4978

This is called de-escalation through escalation. Example WWI and WWII.

Lortekonto

Boomers lived through the post-WWII and decolonization economy were the entire world wanted to build up their production base. They had plenty of social programs while growing up and entering the job market and when it became their turn to pay for those socialprograms with their taxes, then they voted them away. They had union paying jobs, but refused to unionize, while voting against unions and thus the unions and the well paying jobs disappeared. They are going to be the most wealthy generation in history, because they got the support of the generations before them and refused to pass the same support on.

kugelblitz_100

I hate how Redditors constantly down vote comments like this because they go against their belief that Trump will be "punished" for his crazy tariff policies. I can't stand the guy as much as any liberal Redditor but you all need to stop burying your head in the sand and pretending the U.S. economy is just like every other country. It's not. It's gigantic and has grown by leaps and bounds ahead of every other country ever since WWII. Trump is now wielding that huge power to bludgeon other countries into submission. There might be some negative consequences for the U.S. in the long term but those will probably only become visible long after Trump is gone so what does he care? I honestly don't know what to do about that but I do know acting like Canada and the U.S. are going to suffer equally under tariffs is not productive and makes us (liberals) untrustworthy to everyone else since that almost certainly isn't going to happen.

unurbane

It was never a free market though. It’s always been heavily manipulated. See the auto industry forced to make tanks/planes in WWII, financial crisis of ‘08, the buying of GM to stabilize markets, Solyndra incentives, vaccine rollout and mask production in 2020, purchase of Intel (10%) this week, etc etc.

elpresidentedeljunta

There´s always different approaches. After WWII the americans hired the scientists from the german weapons programs. The soviets secured the technicians who actually build the stuff. Both got their results...

Candid_Highlight_116

It's also possible that COVID just straight up killed too many important people. Largest loss since WWII after all. I bet on both of these.

Astronaut-Proof

This is wallstreetbets. Whenever it shifts to paternostersquarebets we’ll read everything with that dumbass accent, eat beans and toast like WWII POWs, and type regarded shit like *dived* instead of dove. Until then, we will type in American. Thank you for your attention to this matter, crooked-toothed bozo.

DK_Notice

This is the correct answer if you're in Econ 101, but it's not so simple. The Fed has certainly taken steps to affect rates at the long end of the curve, especially over the last 20 years. Look at QE, Operation Twist, and also fed policies that effectively lowered long term rates. Going back further look at the Fed's outright yield curve control and rate capping in the 40s during WWII. [https://www.chicagofed.org/publications/economic-perspectives/2021/2](https://www.chicagofed.org/publications/economic-perspectives/2021/2) So yeah, you're right, but it's not black and white regarding the Fed's ability to control rates.

wdjan

Okay, I see what you're getting at, but your original statement is different. The original statement was recovery from the Great Depression, not permanently exceeding value from Great Depression + WWII. Recovery from Great Depression, according to your chart, occurred around 8 or 9 years after 1929. The following drop was WWII. Further, this is not representative of how people actually invest. It is as likely to dump everything in at the peak as it is to dump everything in at the bottom of a trough - nobody does this. Basically any deviation from investing everything you have at the absolute peak in 1929 will result in a shorter recovery period and/or higher returns through to 1949. People invest at different times as money becomes available. Finally, looking at this from a glass half full perspective: Great Depression + WWII were 2 of the most detrimental events of the 20th century and happened essentially back-to-back. Markets were surprisingly resilient through this period given the global turmoil.

DrElkSnout

And saving the auto manufacturers was about securing the means of production in case of war. They don't give two shits about cars, but they need to move equipment around with medium and heavy duty trucks and build tanks, engines and other things if the SHTF. Look at what happened during WWII. A production plant can be re-tooled fairly quickly, and for years those plants can produce items for the military in the event of a world war. Same thing is happening now with chips, data centers and such. This is an arms race, and has the full backing of the US MIC. Some companies will lose. But many will win and they'll win BIG.

EventHorizonbyGA

I want to be clear. I like Buffett. I just don't think people understand who Buffett is. IMO he is the human equivalent of Smaug. He is a Dickens character. People look at Buffett and overlay their expectations of what a person with all that wealth would be. But, in reality Buffett has likely worked 12 hours a day for 6 days a week since he was 14. And people don't realize this. You spend your entire life not spending/wasting money in an obsessive capacity and you'd be rich too. If you did this starting out a rich kid right at the end of WWII you'd be a billionaire as well. He is a miser. Though a friendly one but a miser none-the-less. Oglethorpe, Mercer, Carnie, Melon Nobel all did good with their money. Buffett has never invested in a company working for a cure of disease. He has has claimed the tax policy in the US broken and yet is the largest holder of US Treasuries. A product that is like a vampire on our children's futures. Buffett's ideal, perfect company is selling water to people in the desert. He wants products that people can not live without (literally in the case of dialysis) or that are legally enforced upon us or subsidized from our tax revenues. Like insurance. Like GEICO. The "government" insurance company. Buffett has ridden the greatest wealth creation market in history. He entered it right after WWII and just never got off. His returns are not spectacular. When you consider he didn't buy Apple when the iPod came out. He didn't buy Nike in the 80s. He completely missed bitcoin. All of the real innovation he completely couldn't see. The reason people follow Buffett boggles the mind. Bezos is a much better person to follow. He is actually doing what you would do if you ever had money. Living.

Phenom08

I know someone mentioned this stock recently as a good buy and it was, props to that degenerate. I just hate UNH. I love tendies but at what cost? It’s like buying Porsche or Mitsubishi just before the start of WWII. I love making money but UNH profits off death. Edit, I have UNH as my primary insurance and I don’t want to die, gonna pick up a few shares.

Aumin85

While having a stake in companies hasn't been that common in the US, it has happened many times over. WWI and WWII (RFC), 1979 Chrysler Bailout, 08 Financial Crisis (TARP), COVID pandemic. Additionally, subsidies are quite common in the US, which is a similar way of providing capital and influence over business decisions. Bear in mind, it is now vital that we compete with China, who does this kind of thing all the time.

hak8or

A zero effort post like yours will result in a zero effort copy paste from me, meant to ensure others aren't misled by your post; The statement is largely inaccurate. It contains elements of truth but misrepresents the timeline and the specifics of the U.S. tax system's evolution. Here is a detailed breakdown of the claims: Claim 1: "Pre-IRS, the rich paid no taxes." This is false. * The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) was established as the Bureau of Internal Revenue in 1862 by President Abraham Lincoln to collect the nation's first income tax, which was created to fund the Civil War. This tax was later repealed and ruled unconstitutional. * The permanent, modern federal income tax was established with the ratification of the 16^{th} Amendment in 1913. This is the date most people associate with the beginning of our current income tax system. * Before 1913, the primary sources of revenue for the federal government were tariffs (taxes on imported goods) and excise taxes (taxes on the sale of specific domestic goods like tobacco and alcohol). * The wealthy absolutely paid these taxes. When they purchased imported luxury goods or domestic products subject to excise tax, they paid the tax embedded in the price. However, this system was regressive, meaning it took a larger percentage of income from lower-income individuals than from the wealthy. Still, it is incorrect to say the rich paid "no taxes." Claim 2: "The poors paid high prices." This is the most accurate part of the statement, though it lacks context. * Because the pre-1913 federal government relied heavily on tariffs and excise taxes, the tax burden was disproportionately carried by the working class and poor. * Tariffs raise the price of imported goods, and also allow domestic producers to raise their prices. This means the cost of many everyday necessities was higher for everyone. For a low-income family, this increase in the cost of living consumed a much larger portion of their budget than it did for a wealthy family. * Excise taxes on common goods like sugar, tobacco, and liquor also functioned as a regressive tax, paid at the point of sale by the consumer. * So, while it wasn't a direct tax on their income, the poor and working class effectively paid a significant portion of federal taxes through these higher prices. Claim 3: "Then WWII came, and it turned out the country needed more income." This is chronologically incorrect and misleading. * The event that directly led to the creation of the permanent federal income tax was not World War II. The 16^{th} Amendment was ratified in 1913, a year before World War I began and more than 25 years before the start of World War II. * Initially, the income tax of 1913 applied only to a tiny fraction of the wealthiest Americans. In 1913, less than 1% of the population paid federal income tax. * World War II (1939-1945) was the catalyst that transformed the income tax from a "class tax" (paid only by the rich) into a "mass tax" (paid by the majority of citizens). * To fund the immense cost of the war, Congress passed the Revenue Act of 1942, which dramatically lowered exemptions and raised tax rates. This meant millions of middle- and lower-income Americans had to pay federal income tax for the very first time. * The number of tax returns filed jumped from about 8 million in 1939 to over 50 million by 1945. It was also during WWII, in 1943, that the government introduced payroll withholding to make collecting this new, broad-based tax manageable. Summary * Before 1913: The U.S. government was funded mainly by regressive tariffs and excise taxes. The rich paid these taxes, but the poor bore a disproportionately heavy burden through higher prices on goods. * 1913: The 16^{th} Amendment established a permanent federal income tax, but it initially only affected the wealthiest Americans. * World War II: The need to fund the war effort caused the government to expand the income tax to cover the majority of the population, creating the broad-based system we are familiar with today.

big-papito

Pre-IRS, this is how it worked. The rich paid no taxes, the poors paid high prices. Then WWII came, and it turned out the country needed more income.

eatinpinktacos

Inflation matched last year almost exactly and Wall Street was thrilled because we have tariffs getting close to the level in 1930s...it's how Japan and Germany rebuilt after WWII and still do business...Protectionism is how you protect and or grow domestic jobs in any country...Part of any cost that rise are as fair a tax as it gets which rich to poor pay ...We had trade Imbalances before WWII but then we blew up the competition (Germany and Japan) and the UK was partially destroyed...Our middle class then juggernauted ahead like never before until 1970s...

im_a_squishy_ai

> I'm waiting for something that changes the game with AI. Like a real breakthrough. A disease cured. A self driving car and robot would also work. You should really go read the papers that explain the math behind how these models work. If you're waiting for things like what you listed you're going to be waiting a very long time. How would a statistical model that generates the most likely outcome based on supplied training data ever come up with something completely new? How would it ever reproduce something that it hasn't already seen? What in the mathematics would give any indication that it *could* even theoretically, with all the data we have in the world, generate something that is outside it's training data? Nothing. The math isn't there. These aren't "AIs", they're Large Language Models. That's it. It's a very fancy version of what Alan Turing and Blechly Park used during WWII as part of their toolset to break the enigma code - language frequency analysis. The difference is our computers are orders of magnitude faster and we have orders of magnitude more data to put into them, so we get more realistic responses. But what you're asking is the modern equivalent of "could the enigma code breaker create a new language?", and the answer is no, because it only works on the highest probability of what it's given in the training set.

Oregonmushroomhunt

From Ukraine’s side, this isn’t just about tariffs — it’s about survival. Every barrel of Russian oil sold, no matter who buys it, pumps cash straight into the Kremlin’s war chest. That money turns into artillery shells, missiles, and Iranian drones that level apartment blocks and kill civilians. When India calls the U.S. response “unfair trade measures” and threatens WTO retaliation, it reads here as ignoring the fact that this war isn’t a trade dispute — it’s the largest invasion in Europe since WWII. The sanctions aren’t random; they’re part of an international effort (led by countries actually sending billions in aid to Ukraine) to force Russia to the negotiating table by cutting its revenue. If major economies keep buying Russian oil, it undercuts that entire strategy and prolongs the war. From Kyiv’s view, arguing over steel and aluminium while still feeding Moscow’s budget isn’t just bad optics — it’s choosing short-term economic gain over ending a war that’s destroying a nation.

iom2222

Yeah you guys are collaterals but you are in the minority now. You represent the old America. The one that was. But it’s all gone now. It’s all corrupted. And I can tell you for a fact and for sure that Canadians tourists are not coming back in US. Even post Trump. This is over for good, you need to understand how profound the shift was. And there is not forgiving or forgetting. Americans totally under estimate how profound this shift is. Canada will probably get closer or Europe or others Asia allies. It’s going to take a generation to forget. This is how serious the damage by Trump is, it cannot be understated. And what I keep saying is that Europe is 2 months being Canada I. Boycotting American services and goods (Netflix, Amazon…. Disney). Consider them already bankrupted. They will be boycotted world wide. Trump killed the American tribe. You are going to a level pre WWII. All that liberation credit…. Burnt in 6 months by just 1 man that still has legal trouble and legacy. The friendship and the links with former Allies had been severed. In a few years you will understand how deep the division is. You cannot imagine it now. The damages done by Trump are enormous and irreversible. The sonner tou can assimilate that the better for what follows. America is just living from leftovers today !!! https://youtu.be/NdnwXeSSAII

creedx12k

"Mein Kampf Cankles" has it completely wrong. His Tariffs and jacked up economy WILL cause the next "Great Depression." Historically every time massive tariffs (taxes paid by we the people) are imposed, a recession hits followed by a depression. Severe economic downturn caused by strict tariffs and the stock market crashing. This is exactly how the Great Depression hit prior to WWII. We're on that same road.

Strange-Scarcity

He didn’t learn about tariffs. He also seems to think that the US is the center of Global trade like we were from the end of WWII until the 1960’s. We’re somewhere around 9% of global trade now. We don’t control that anymore. His policies have weakened the US more than anything else could have done and now we may be cut loose from global trade and it could take decades to re-establish a good position.

Richvideo

They forget that after WWII, the rest of the world was in a state of disarray, so we had no competition, and we had to produce goods for the rest of the world...That only lasted a few decades.

BrianScienziato

Um... Really? \~80 million people died in WWII. That's a lot of people who couldn't avoid it...

DJHumanRights

I'm not Jewish or Israeli. But I have read the prophecies and the old testament so I know for a fact this will be a big war, just like WWI and WWII. Type Amalek Putin in google and you will see what the media in Israel are saying about Putin. Basically he's a Nazi, but the world knows this already because the ICC is after him. So it is relevant to investing today, highly relevant because the wars are growing and the defence share prices are growing too.

Mountain_Sand3135

oops ....i guess America is losing this 3d chess game. Keep telling you MAGA , this is NOT POST WWII this is a modern global economy and we better wake up to that.

x_realtnt_x

This is just wrong. There is no shift towards weapons. At least not more than anyone else since the US betrayed all their allies. Comparing this to the developments before WWII is just nonesense…

Short-Taro-5156

In 1950s post WWII the average home size was 983sqft. It was a bit higher before the war (approaching 1200sqft) and then continued to balloon after the post-war housing boom. Easily google-able, search "average home size 1950." And this completely discounts the fact that the average square footage PER PERSON in a household has ballooned even more. The average household size in 1950 was a bit over 4 people, prior to that you had families of 6 or more living in ~1000sqft or less homes. People could easily afford to take care of a family, but we expect such a high quality of life and every modern amenity that it's unfeasible. Most people aren't willing to live as a family of 4 in a 1000sqft home because that's no longer culturally the norm as it was in decades past. You weren't expected to buy tons of toys at christmas and spends tons on toys, presents, baby food, tons of new clothes & baby shoes, diapers, high levels of medical care for the child. People went with less and accepted more risk. Nobody is willing to do that nowadays and honestly, it's culturally frowned upon. The narrative of the low birth rates is that it's economic in nature but that has no basis in reality. Perhaps it's economic in the sense that people can afford to have children but culture & expectations prevent them from doing so. This is global and not limited to the US, and has little to do with economics in my opinion. I understand people feel it's economic in nature but I don't think that fits the reality of our economic situation vs the past where people had plenty of children.

Facktat

I know the severity of this shit show makes it not funny anymore but I still remember the amount of Muslims or people with roots in the middle east calling "genocide Joe" and backing Trump. Didn't work out that great for them, didn't it? Kind of remembers me of the *Verband nationaldeutscher Juden*, the german organization of Jews supporting Adolf Hitler before WWII. They opposed Marxism and supported the idea of an "moral rebirth of the German people". They thought the regime would distinguish between "loyal" and "disloyal" Jews. The history is rarely gentle to the groups supporting fascism. American muslims already found out and American rednecks are heading towards finding out.

Yiplzuse

LOL, some people, they would have argued against bombing ball bearing plants in WWII. Ball bearings are no threat! It’s the tanks and planes! /s. I got laid off in March, aerospace. We went three months with less and less work. Company is gonna tank most likely. Looks like Lockheed Martin scrapped or seriously delayed their space hotel.

elziion

At least you stopped calling us Westerners entitled and ignorant. It’s actually a shame that most people overseas perceive us this way out of context. I grew up having to start working really young, but the decision steeming from capitalism has nothing to do with me and i’m tired of being told we are all “evil colonizers”. This blame game is not helping anyone, you’re right. I can guarantee, most of us have nothing to do with the decisions made by previous colonizers. Most of our families and the generations that followed worked hard to build our countries. It’s quite common that many of us come from farmers and our grandparents fought for us to have a decent school system under the promise and guise for a better future. Blaming us for the damages done during colonization when most of the people a hundred years ago were busy rebuilding after WWII is unfair. Especially when Britain spent 60 years repaying the US and Canada for its help afterwards, whilst they were slowly rebuilding. Japan was completely obliterated after the US dropped bombs on them, and is now one of the most successful countries. They closed their doors in order to rebuild. Didn’t blame us for their problems and now they are one of the biggest economies in the world. China suffered massively during the 20th century, yet they somehow managed to pull themselves back. Everyone was broke after WWII, and blaming us for all your problems helps no one. I’m sorry, but having been called all sorts of names because i’m white and people associate me with their problems, when I wasn’t even bord, and being told I can’t say anything, is unnerving. The West used to have a lot of factories and was able to produce high end quality products, and that was something that powered the Industrial era. Everyone was able to work, now many of those jobs are offshored at lower prices. It’s a fact that it doesn’t help our economic system in the long term to do so. Offshoring our companies didn’t help us, I blame greedy corporations and politicians that enacted those policies against our consent. And policies can be reversed, and if politicians don’t do anything to help their people, it’s obviously not going to go well. The US forcing companies to bring jobs within their country is what I was saying earlier: Trump putting his country first and it’s what most people in America voted for. And it’s absolutely normal that you would want your country to put itself first when it comes to making business decisions.

AICHEngineer

They dont really teach you that stuff at school, this is just wallstreet leverage jargon. TLDR, only diversified risks are compensated. With leverage, you can take on more risk. It costs the (EFFR + ~0.5%) × 1.1 for every point of leverage, plus the higher expense ratios for the funds. For example, SSO or SPUU (2x SPY) cost like ~5-5.25% per year on leverage costs, plus their expense ratios. Historically they have outperformed unlevered 1x (when simulated back to 1885). Lots of sub periods where they suck, like the great depression, dot com, GFC, etc. Otherwise, they tend to do great like post WWII, depression recovery, the 80s/90s, 2009 onwards

majesticstraits

That tariff literally caused the agricultural depression that was the precursor to the Great Depression, and everyone knows what happened with Smoot Hawley worsening the Great Depression. There’s a reason pretty much every economist is in favor of low tariffs, and the post WWII era of free trade led to unmatched prosperity both in the US and around the globe

awildjabroner

keep in mind Palantir is Peter Theil's company and he just so happens to be one of the individual driving forces to unravel and remake the post WWII social order that has enveloped the entire globe for the past 75ish years. The stock market and capital investment has long since detatched from actual P&L statements and numbers and moreso valuations are based on personalities in key positions and speculation on future 'tech'

rvitanza

I can see a world with third world countries leapfrogging with AI in the next 15 years, where advanced nations circle back to conservative isolationism seen pre WWII. A new wave of social constructs and class systems and extreme global division between the a now extremely degenerative liberal mindset open to come what may and a conservative one (which would be equivalent to the pre 2010 liberal one). Unsure about the commercial/capitalist outlook but hard to imagine “big” companies failing as they will adopt and absorb new trends. Up: Ai, energy, defense, software, hardware (materials with moats/mining not factories) fintech. This pov may be beside the point but I’m wondering if you foresee similar or completely distinct social shifts?

Stock_Two5985

The sad reality is we are in need of it to eradicate communism and maintain our global dominance. America has been in a steady decline the last 80 years. The end of WWII was our peak as a country and we’ve been losing our global dominance ever since about the 80’s or 90’s

SoFlo1

We have the smallest herd size in modern history, highest beef prices since WWII and the highest feed prices ever - all of which has driven beef prices to record highs - and these idiots want to export out of the US? Insane.

Ps11889

I seem to recall after WWII, that Japan purchased a lot of US goods. As such, this is not the first time they've had open markets. Just saying.

fuckingsignupprompt

You really have to look into the details. What exactly does the US import from Indonesia, and what exactly does it export? Are there alternative countries that the business can move? Does the tariff make enough of a difference to achieve the intended goal? For example, the US has no domestic palm oil agriculture to protect. So, tariff does nothing except increase prices. If that increase is significant enough, the US will increase imports from Malaysia and decrease imports from Indonesia. So, that hurts Indonesia without benefitting the US, the winners are Malaysia and other minor Palm oil producers. Is the intention to start up palm farming in the US? If no, then the US lost a major potential ally in China's neighborhood for no reason at all. Do that for all major trade commodities between the two countries to get close to figuring out whether it is an overall benefit. If Indonesia does all the things it has promised it will do on the import side, it does appear favorable to the US on the whole. You also have to consider the long-term costs. Being bullied by Trump will make countries look for alternatives to the US, seek trade relations excluding the US, look favorably to US alternatives like China or BRICS, as well as making them likely to cancel all these deals as soon as Trump is out of office in '28. Post-WWII US-led order was based on the idea that tariff-free trade would benefit the whole world, especially the US. In fact, it would benefit the US so much that it could still turn a profit after spending on maintaining a military that could patrol all of world's oceans, fight wars on multiple fronts, lead coups in multiple continents, buy out friends and enemies alike with billions of dollars in annual "aid". Now, we've entered a new phase where Trump, and by extension majority of the US public, believe that that old order isn't benefitting the US anymore. In my opinion, Trump/US has correctly identified that there's a problem, I'm not sure they've identified what the actual problem is, and my bet is they're definitely wrong on what the solution should be, assuming there is even a solution. There are benefits to targetted tariffs. What the US is doing isn't that.

AlexanderDifficult

And that was in large part thanks to WWII and postwar boom

ShotPhase2766

Sorry could someone please explain to me was Japan not open to trade before? I’ve been driving a Mitsubishi for the past 10 years, where did it come from? Where did my neighbor’s kei truck come from for that matter? Where do all the other Japanese products I use and consume come from if not Japan? Does that not mean Japan is as open to trade with us as they have been since we first historically forced them to start trading with us and even more so since the end of WWII so what could “open their country to trade” mean in this context?

SirWethington

Basically, Japan just bought more Treasury Bonds to lend the US more cash and he's taking credit for using the BoJ as a piggy bank as have all US presidents since post-WWII

Minute-Fix-6827

Eh, I've heard folks say the same about why American cars don't sell well in the E.U. - I think it pertains to how those post-WWII cities are designed and the width of the streets. Never been to either place, but the IASIP gang certainly looked ridiculous driving their American SUV in Ireland. Pretty sure they filmed on location.

MattieShoes

Just some quick digging... 1962-1981 with dividends reinvested was about 270% gains but 212% inflation, so ~0.84% annual real return, the lowest in the data set going back to 1948. Yay for stagflation! Highest 20 year period of real returns was 13.4% was 1980-1999 -- the melt up before the dot com bust. Both average and median were about 7.1% Lowest in recent history was 1999-2018 at 3.38%, catching the dot com crash but missing the preceeding melt-up. 2005-2024 is 7.6% If we want to see patterns, returns sucked in the late 40s because WWII, rose to a peak in the 1960s with the post WWII boom, dropped to a nadir around 1980 with stagflation, peaked in 1999 with the dot com bubble, bottomed out around 2018, and are currently on an upward trend.

a_standing_poop

OPEN till I fucking die. This is day one of WWII buckle the fuck up and hold or go home

Kaymish_

Anything but bonds. There's a high likelihood of a return to financial repression akin to the end of WWII where the government ordered the Fed to hold interest rates artificially low and over printed money to inflate away the debt. In the 1950s and 60s bond holders were big losers and equity holders were big winners. Bonds are considered cash like entities anyway.

dustnbonez

Covid isn’t a metric at all. It’s another global event. It’s just we’re still talking investing in stocks regardless of an event occurring or not. Another event is bound to occur again. Both VTI and NVDA went through COVID. NVDA just performed better. Lots of stocks going to perform better. She’s likely not just investing the initial 1k and plans to slowly save for her son. At the start of the game I’d be picking a few individual stocks and then getting some etfs to balance it out. Other notable global events ala ChatGPT (because Google sucks now lol) The Great Depression (1929–1939) • Event: The Wall Street Crash of October 1929. • Impact: U.S. stocks lost nearly 90% of their value at the worst point. It triggered massive bank failures, unemployment, and global economic depression. • Legacy: Led to the creation of the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission) and tighter financial regulations. ⸻ ⚔️ 2. World War II (1939–1945) • Event: Outbreak of WWII. • Impact: Markets initially fell with uncertainty, but U.S. stocks rebounded during the war as wartime production boosted the economy. Defense and manufacturing companies rose. ⸻ 💥 3. 1973–1974 Oil Crisis • Event: OPEC oil embargo. • Impact: Stock markets fell sharply due to skyrocketing oil prices, inflation, and an economic recession. The S&P 500 lost nearly 50% in 2 years. ⸻ 📉 4. Black Monday (1987) • Event: On October 19, 1987, global stock markets crashed. • Impact: The Dow Jones dropped 22% in one day — still the largest single-day percentage drop. Caused by computer-driven trading and panic selling. ⸻ 💻 5. Dot-com Bubble Burst (2000–2002) • Event: Collapse of many overvalued internet companies. • Impact: The Nasdaq lost ~78% of its value from its peak, wiping out trillions in market capitalization. ⸻ 🏦 6. Global Financial Crisis (2007–2009) • Event: Subprime mortgage collapse & Lehman Brothers bankruptcy. • Impact: The S&P 500 lost over 50% of its value from peak to trough. It sparked the Great Recession. ⸻ 🌍 7. COVID-19 Pandemic (2020–2021) • Event: Global lockdowns & economic shutdowns. • Impact: The stock market crashed in March 2020 but rebounded quickly due to massive government stimulus, low interest rates, and tech sector growth. ⸻ Other Notable Examples: • Cuban Missile Crisis (1962): Short-term panic. • September 11 Attacks (2001): Markets closed for days; stocks fell sharply upon reopening. • Brexit Vote (2016): Short-term volatility, but mostly regional impact. • Federal Reserve Interest Rate Shocks: E.g., the Volcker Shock in the early 1980s caused high volatility as the Fed aggressively raised rates to fight inflation.

Jboycjf05

China also came out of WWII with all the associated horrors of the Japanese occupation, as well as a devastating civil war where the opposition leadership fled and was leading an opposition government from Taiwan. They were already exhausted by foreign atrocities and still had a major internal, political enemy right on their doorstep. There were way too many crosswinds to unify them against a government they supported.

thebiglebowskiisfine

People need to understand generations. Boomers are in their mid to late 70s, and some are older - they are already retired for the most part. This is the boom generation, born after WWII to returning soldiers. One of the largest generations known to the USA. They hold the bulk of the wealth and are on the edge of aging out of their homes and into managed care facilities. They didn't inherit much from their parents, and some were forced to support their parents as they aged into the nursing home. They are tight as fuck and greedy, growing up in the Regan era. They didn't give their kids two nickels to rub together. Their Boomers' kids are Gen-X, now in their early to mid-50s. Gen-X is a much smaller generation than the Boomers and stands to inherit a fortune. They went through multiple wars, recessions, housing and internet bubbles, and terrorist attacks. The economy for Gen-X wasn't favorable for most. You are seeing some of the wealth transfer that Gen-X is being gifted now. Money is being sloshed around mostly in retail and housing prices, stock, and Bitcoin. This will only accelerate as we move forward and the tsunami continues, but housing should free up as Boomers age out. Inflation is levitating on inherited spending, and that won't last forever. Bubbles pop, recessions happen, things turn south. Gen-X probably doesn't have the foresight to hold onto most of this capital. They financially pander to their kids like crazy. The 29-44 Y/O Gen Y (millennials) aren't in this food chain for the most part (yet) - but once the market crashes by 40-60% on some strange technicality or black swan event, it will take 5-10 years to return to today's market sentiment, possibly putting them in the hole more than anything. There has never been a generation that relies more on their parents than Gen Y, and will probably continue throughout their parents' lives. Any generation younger than this doesn't have the liquidity to make an impact.

agentSmartass

That’s one of the few word he remembers from the 50s. That’s his entire policy. Hardlining the words his father used to use and his 1980s «success» story. Trump’s whole vibe is like someone stuck in a 1960s factory break room, shouting about manufacturing, steel, coal, and «jobs, jobs, jobs»He wants to drag America back to the post-WWII glory days, where «great» meant factories puffing smoke and «winning» meant beating someone else, not working with them. To him, trade isn’t even remotely connected to today’s complex and interconnected supply chain. He doesn’t understand one bit of that. Rather – everything is a bar fight where only one guy walks out with the trophy. Every issue is a deal between “strong men,” straight out of a coked up 1980s boardroom. Ironically, all this talk just means more government meddling, more red tape, and less of the free market America used to champion. Anything invented after 1985? It’s suspicious, probably woke, and definitely needs to be smashed. If it’s new, it’s broken. If it’s green, it’s weak. Trump doesn’t want to move America forward—he wants to hit the rewind button so hard we end up in the Stone Age, because he’s a demented monkey and that’s the only words he remembers.

thighmaster69

Hope you did that in Feb bc a lot of that is priced in already lmfao esp with where DXY is at But I think a lot of US investors are realizing what the rest of the world has been doing this whole time: in the long term, averaged over time, unless you're Warren Buffett, diversification is the name of the game. US investors have gotten away solely investing in the S&P because of the post-WWII dominance of the US, but there's no guarantee it'll continue into the future. Just ~~VOO~~ *VT* and chill.

viktor72

I’d say we’re moving towards the direction of the US and the USSR during WWII.

SwordofGlass

The USD replaced the PS after WWII. UK’s economic dominance didn’t collapse, it gradually shifted.

Glad-Veterinarian365

That is a more apt comparison, thank u for humoring me I guess the answer is firms will keep their best and have them ramp up productivity? We aren’t in that post WWII glow up anymore though so I doubt it’ll shake out exactly the same but I do have to wonder where the ppl that lost jobs to computers ended up

Slimy_Wog

If that black swan event is WWII. We all will be screwed.

Martzee2021

What are you talking about? The WWII inherited from Biden was ended the first 24 hours in January 2025!

vamprobozombie

Just take a drive in the rust belt we used to make everything after everyone's factories were destroyed after WWII. My hometown in CT even has two closed down rusting mills that used to make clothing. That said the amount of pollution this produces and factory jobs tend not pay well anymore but it sitting there rusting is not a good look and a reminder that we lost it.

supaloopar

Ok, doesn't mean you can't find a common purpose What even is the UN by your measure? The Axis and Allies of WWII are on the same body

mrlewiston

Crazy times? Well your not heading off to WWII, the American civil war, Vietnam. We are not living through the Great Depression. The plague in Europe. Those were crazy times!! It is difficult to watch deportations and the income inequality, housing shortages… in our time.

nicolas_06

Yeah covid was once in a lifetime event for say health related issues and people being locked down worldwide. This didn't happen during 2000 or 2008 crisis. I am not even sure that in the US people got lockdown during WWII. That's why I say in its category. Think like 2000 and 2008 are "common" for sure. But my point was not that at all. Thing that you see once in a lifetime are very difficult to predict. You maybe had predicted covid 6 months in advance, I'd say nobody had.

ConsiderationKey1658

We kicked your ass in WWII

New-Wall-7398

How bout you take yours off and do some research on the lead up to WWII. If you actually do so, there are numerous similarities that are similar enough to explain why people are equating then and now.

Spankynpetey

Tbh, recovery from the worst financial disaster, like the Great Depression, took time, but since WWII, recoveries have been remarkably quick.

whk1992

The USA is leading the world’s socialists including national socialists. So many WWII veterans are furious in their graves.

acctgamedev

Our debt is close to the highest it's ever been in the history of the country, even higher than the post WWII decades and we had massive economic growth from exports to help us get out of that hole. We had presidents that were fiscally responsible, kept a fairly balanced budget and essentially let inflation work down our debt. These are unprecedented times with payment on interest eating up a greater percent of tax revenue and no plan to ever reduce deficits. Heaven forbid we hit a recession in the next 10 years.

biggamehaunter

Only if Germany has electric panzer during WWII

im_a_squishy_ai

Won't be the world's largest economy for long. Brain drain is a real thing. Germany was the peak of physics before WWII. The fleeing of talent to America and America's open reception to anyone was a large part of what helped make America a super power (along with not having its cities bombed to rubble). Existing talent will leave and go elsewhere, new talent won't come in from internationally. It won't take long either, 5 years the effects will start to be seen, by 10 years they'll have set. We've already been seeing some symptoms of this for years with profit focus. US automakers got trounced by Japanese and Korean manufacturers in ICE vehicles, Tesla is currently getting trounced by BYD. DeepSeek was such a big deal and the propaganda machine spun up because they had an innovation US companies didn't, and they had to keep the insistence that they were just copying.

nmanclank

School is the problem, you don't learn shit. Hell, I learned more in CoD: World at War than I did about WWII in any history class. School taught us that there was a Holocaust and Nazis, that's about it. Sadly, you have to pretty much educate yourselves at this point. The public education systems are filled with teachers who either don't give a shit, or are so underfunded and overwhelmed that they simply fall short.

ETERNALBLADE47

China would invite the winning countries of WWII, basically the 5 members of Security Council in UN. China as the host, invite US, Ruassia, UK, France. I don't see a possibility that Trump would refuse the invite.

ericDXwow

Zero fucks given because both EU and Canada bended over faster than the French did in WWII lol.

DevilsAdvocate77

I was thinking more like WWII

TheJourneyItself

Serious comment? Maybe read the history of the WWII Pacific Theatre - for China the war started years earlier than in Europe

Accomplished_Row5869

Geneva convention: most of it is because of Canadians in WWI and WWII. Let's puck around and find out 🤣

cyb3rg0d5

You are very right, cuz the last time the US was in an official war it was in WWII.

Ben2St1d_5022

No facts to any public outlets. I mean he is the Commander in Chief and knows exactly how successful the operation was. One for the history books and for military strategy. It was only one of the most precise and successful airborne U.S. military operations ever. WWII and now this. Move your hatred and TDS aside and admit the facts now they’re known and understood for the most part. This operation was immensely successful. On many different fronts as well.

careyectr

Yes, better entry prices do show up after record highs—but they usually arrive more slowly, and cost more in missed upside, than most of us expect. A quick reality-check on how often the market “gives you a dip”: New highs are followed by small pullbacks all the time. LPL’s long-term data show the S&P 500 averages roughly three drawdowns of -5 % to -10 % every year, and it suffers at least one 10 % correction in about two-thirds of calendar years.  When you sharpen the pencil to “How long do I have to wait?” the numbers get uncomfortable. A Clearnomics study looking at all post-WWII highs found that an investor who insisted on a -3 % pullback sat in cash for about 69 days on average and still missed ~2 % of upside while waiting. Holding out for a textbook -5 % discount stretched the wait to 291 days and forfeited roughly 13 % in foregone gains. My own Nasdaq-100 back-test (1985-2025 daily closes) echoes that pattern: • Median maximum drawdown within six months of an all-time high: -4.7 % • A dip of -5 % or worse has occurred in ~60 % of those six-month windows. • A deeper -10 % correction shows up only ~23 % of the time—and when it does, the index usually ends the same six-month span higher anyway. In plain English: you often get a wiggle room of 3-5 %, you sometimes get 8-10 %, and you rarely get the 15-20 % “fat pitch” while the longer-term trend is still rising. ⸻ What that means if you’re still on the sidelines Staying uninvested for the possibility of a pullback is itself a market call. History says the cost of waiting grows quickly unless the dip materialises fast, and that cost compounds if the trend keeps grinding upward. If you need to get money to work but want a margin of safety: – Split the stake. Put, say, half to work now and stage the rest in tranches every few weeks or at predefined technical levels (50-day or 100-day moving average supports often coincide with 3-6 % give-backs). – Pair entries with a decision rule for when to stop averaging down (for example, if QQQ falls 12-15 % you reassess fundamentals rather than automatically buying more). – Alternatively, use an options collar or a 5-10 % stop-loss to cap the downside while still getting market exposure; that lets the “waiting” budget pay for hedges instead of idle cash. ⸻ Bottom line Better prices are possible—small dips are statistically likely and larger ones remain a non-trivial risk—but the market’s default state after a fresh high is gradual follow-through, not immediate reversal. If your time horizon is months to years, scaling in beats sitting out; if your horizon is days to weeks, set clear levels and be ready to act quickly when they appear.

-jinxiii

I was more referencing the WWII pushing countries out of the Great Depression. But admittedly Vietnam wars effect was a blind spot.  Either way I’m not surprised with the current love affair with public traded companies with govt contracts (see Steve Miller and co.)

Next-Problem728

WWI folks didn’t think WWII would happen in their lifetimes.

__thr0wm3Inth3trash

New House bill projects more debt burden than fucking post-WWII levels, how is the regard circus still functional

accruedainterest

That’s actually crazy. Everyone remembers the headline “ceasefire broken within hours” but when there’s no attacks between them for weeks, no one realizes just cuz there’s no headline? That was my entire point. Did you think in WWII all the fighting stopped immediately just cuz Germany and Japan surrendered?

EventHorizonbyGA

That is not true. By a long shot. The US is just retracting back to the mean. Post WWII, the US had a monopoly on manufacturing and since the 1970s been the dominate banking center. People who were fortunate enough to live through this time period in US History had very easy lives. But, that monopoly was lost in the late 1970s and now the rest of the world is eroding trust in the dollar. So the average American is just falling back to the world mean. Which is traumatic for most.

MiddleOccasion1394

... a ceasefire is not "ended". By that definition, the Civil War, the Revolutionary War, WWI and WWII are still in a ceasefire.

bobbymcpresscot

Over money. It’s always over money lol.  We weren’t talking design requirements so I don’t know why you mentioned it. The US has been at war 222 years of its almost 250 years in existence.  The US also being involved in conflicts and wars since 1945 is also true. Korean war Vietnam war, proxy wars with the USSR during the Cold War, countless police actions in South America where the A10 was actually first used, gulf war, Afghanistan war, reinvaded iraq. Thats just since WWII and makes up damn near 75 of the last 80 years.  I don’t get why you would lie about the US and its love for war. 

ultrachem

Your entry into WWI was due to a facbricated Zimmermann Telegram and your entry into WWII was due to the Japanese so kindly fuck off will you

AmbitiousEconomics

Sure but the last war that was declared was what, WWII? The president can effectively declare war even without a formal declaration.

bobbymcpresscot

because 25% of the federal budget goes to the military the US is constantly picking fights in the middle east as a soft target to flood billions of dollars into the MIC to fight goat farmers. Good example is the A10, which was developed specifically for just the middle east, and in any real conflict it would never see the skies again because its too slow and fat. We've been doing this constantly since WWII. Since 1776 the US has been at war something like 222 of its 240 years of existence.

Buckets-of-Gold

It’s a very large number no matter how you split it. We have one of the highest debt to GDP in the developed world, behind only Japan, Singapore, Greece, and Italy. Internally, we have not seen a ratio this high since WWII. Our interest payments are about to eclipse total military spending/total spending on Medicare.

machogrande2

It's certainly not completely implausable considering how many times the US military has gotten its ass kicked since WWII. They may have the most things that go boom but they're shit at training and accomplishing goals.

frenchvanillax

What's with the down votes? Post-war market rallies: WWII +30% in 1946 Korean War +25% in 1954 Vietnam War +38% in 1975 Gulf War +28% in 1991 Iraq War +26% in 2003 Russia-Ukraine ... WWIII ...

The_real_Covfefe-19

We're giving Israel $3.9 billion a year on average since WWII, our own government acts as their lapdog, and now they're genociding Palestinians, torturing prisoners, bombing Iran, and dragging us into yet another Middle East boondoggle. It's infuriating. 

The_real_Covfefe-19

$318 billion given to Israel by the US since WWII. Insane. 

Educational_Peak_770

The US absolutely sucks ass at trying to support the country it invades. Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. But what is lost is these countries lose in fucking hours to the US military, then we spend the rest of the decade trying to rebuild. It’s why we were so successful in WWII — nobody comes close to our capability to just bombing the living daylights out of people.

floo82

Lol blockbuster video was actually named after the WWII bombs called blockbusters, so that would kinda be full circle there

FafnirSnap_9428

Exactly. Major powers entered and  came out of the war in a boom. But it didn't lift all boats.  I would blame that success for the rationale behind most wars post WWII as they were all trying to recapture what happened despite the fact that a global conflict like that hasn't and (I'll make the bold statement) won't happen again. 

BennyL1986

So was it Vietnam or during WWII?

3xonblack

#Between 1940 and 1945, during WWII, U.S. GDP increased 74%. Thank you for your attention to this matter