I never heard of that term but it feels like something academia made up to justify being a bigot “intellectually”

I’m sorry you and everyone on campus had to go through that 😔

It’s helpful to look at a graph because you can see visually what they mean as losses and gains are always relative to the previous close. Mathematically you’re of course correct but unfortunately finance isn’t discussed that way 😭

It’s all relative to the previous close which was 38,314. So saying it jumped 300 points means it went to 38,614. Right before it did that the index was around 36,900+ (I don’t know the specific value). 38,614-36,900=1,714. That’s the 1700 loss erased they’re talking about. Makes sense?

Foreign policy is fried…

So 4 times 0.25 is literally 1 so elasticity is now functionally irrelevant mathematically speaking. And now we are left with a basic relative change formula that just expresses if there’s a trade deficit or surplus. NOT what the tariff rate would be.

So I’m struggling to understand how you have two price elasticities and the only difference between the two are tariffs and yet one is inelastic and one is very elastic. I’m no economist (by trade) so maybe it’s ME! Anyways!!

If elasticity of import prices with respect to tariffs is 0.25 that means its inelastic which in my opinion would only apply to hard to substitute items that would cause demand to barely budget and not like non-essentials or easily substituted goods

Ugh there’s so much more I want to say on that picture and a lot of nuance to add but I’ll leave it there. Let’s get into this formula bc this is where I really cackled… imma do a new thread

There’s a lot here. But the biggest two ports I’ll make are: 1) this list of reasons while incomplete hardly feels like a justification for tariffs 2) US consumer demand is not being siphoned out of the US economy if that demand is still being captured by American companies…

“To conceptualize reciprocal tariffs, the tariff rates that would drive bilateral trade deficits to zero were computed.” You already lost me because this is assuming trade deficits are caused by tariffs on American products and not the economic situation of the other country…