this post was submitted on 01 Jun 2025
271 points (99.6% liked)

Leopards Ate My Face

9741 readers
60 users here now

Rules:

  1. The mods are fallible; if you've been banned or had a post/comment removed, please appeal.
  2. Off-topic posts will be removed. If you don't know what "Leopards ate my Face" is, try reading this post.
  3. If the reason your post meets Rule 1 isn't in the source, you must add a source in the post body (not the comments) to explain this. If the reason is in the source but is tedious to find (e.g. in a lengthy video), you must add an explanation for where it is.
  4. Posts should use high-quality sources (for a rough idea, check out this list), and posts should retain the title (if one exists) from works like news articles, videos, etc. You may (but need not) edit your post if the source changes the title. Other types of posts should have a title which accurately, relatively neutrally describes their contents.
  5. For accessibility reasons, an image of text must either have alt text or a transcription in the post body.
  6. Reposts within 1 year or the Top 100 of all time are subject to removal.
  7. This is not exclusively a US politics community. You're encouraged to post stories about anyone from any place in the world at any point in history as long as you meet the other rules.
  8. All Lemmy.World Terms of Service apply.

Also feel free to check out:

Icon credit C. Brück on Wikimedia Commons.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

The article says:

Ken Griffin says Trump’s tariff strategy is eroding America’s global standing and investor trust in U.S. financial stability.

We already knew this was going to happen. On June 26, 2024 Reuters released an article with the headline "16 Nobel Prize-winning economists say Trump policies will fuel inflation". Trump campaigned on tariffs.

In my view this really undermines the creditably of Ken Griffin because an investor should be able to accurately asses information and determine its credibility to make proper investing decisions. Someone who falls for Fox "News" drivel wouldn't be a good investor. This is why Warren Buffet is outperforming other investors now, he properly prepared himself for Trump's tariffs.

Source for donation amount: https://www.opensecrets.org/elections-overview/biggest-donors

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 69 points 10 months ago (4 children)

Can you imagine your entire job being forecasting what other people's intentions are and making decisions based on it, and being so shit at it that you decide to prop up a guy that's openly saying he's going to obliterate the international economic system that makes your job easy?

[–] Angry_Autist@lemmy.world 24 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Some day you will realize that almost nothing C-suites do really makes any difference and they are there just to absorb blame and be a figurehead

[–] jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de 15 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Absorb blame assumes they would face consequences when things go wrong.

[–] CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com 9 points 10 months ago

They do. They get fired from their cushy jobs and land with a golden parachute.

[–] jonne@infosec.pub 9 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

I don't believe they're that worried about it. A lot of people made a lot of money buying up 'distressed' assets after the GFC with the cheap credit available. If you're wealthy enough, you make money when things are going well, and you buy up anything that's on the market when there's a downturn (preferably with subsidies/cheap credit provided by the government).

If you don't need to have the income from a job to live off, the business cycle doesn't really affect you, it's all play money where you can be on any side of a trade.

[–] Reverendender@sh.itjust.works 3 points 10 months ago

I cannot, in fact, imagine this. Not in any way close to what the reality apparently is, anyway.

[–] rottingleaf@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago

The other option was friendlier to billionaires and CEOs, but had the downside of bringing expected stagnation. Probably they judged that this variant has a better average expectation or whatever.