mattpeterson.bsky.social
Covering policymaking, economics, and financial markets for Barron’s. [email protected]
mattpeterson.me
1,530 posts
3,938 followers
1,394 following
Prolific Poster
Conversation Starter
comment in response to
post
Israel does not possess the conventional weaponry to destroy or functionally defeat the Fordow and Nantanz sites. I suspect that the US doesn’t either. It’s gotta be nukes or boots on the ground.
comment in response to
post
4. Occam's razor suggests this attack has happened not because of fresh intelligence about Iranian activity, but because Israel saw an opportunity: Iran & militia allies are weak, nuclear talks were faltering & IAEA just censured Iran yesterday. Preventive, but not pre-emptive.
comment in response to
post
1- This is WAR in Middle East between 2 main nemesis.
2. Trump admin. trying to shield troops by denying involvement. TBD if Iran or proxies spare US targets.
3. Ramifications to be felt in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, maybe Gulf depending how far Tehran chooses to retaliate
comment in response to
post
(Reports now that Fordow has been struck.)
comment in response to
post
Say more.
comment in response to
post
Didn’t Bessent say that it was actually in August, but Congress needed to pass by mid-July so it’s done before their break? I might have missed a development.
comment in response to
post
This piece is so badly wrong about the politics it’s hard to know where to start. Could the market keep on whistling past the graveyard? Sure. But that isn’t reason to wish a coherent economic policy into reality.
comment in response to
post
PS if you're confused you're in good company. The White House itself initially forgot about those first-term tariffs. www.barrons.com/articles/chi...
comment in response to
post
No, this isn’t a change. They retain the 25% 301 tariffs on many goods from the first term.
Plus 20% fentanyl and 10% baseline/reciprocal.
comment in response to
post
In other words...slowing down our economy and putting upward pressure on interest rates by passing this bill means this bill costs us money both directly and indirectly.
comment in response to
post
He’s headed to Bedminster, so, yep.
comment in response to
post
That's very good
comment in response to
post
Treasury yields are rising on the just-fine jobs news, since it suggests that Powell won't cut. Trump wants the opposite—lower yields. The best thing he could do to drive down interest rates would be to reconsider the tax bill. That won't happen, so we're stuck with him jawboning Powell.