地缘政治｜“衰退交易”下特朗普理想施政路径的抉择

Core Viewpoint - The external geopolitical environment in late March is characterized by increasing disturbances, but it does not alter the recovery of market confidence [1][4] Group 1: Market Concerns and Economic Data - Recent market concerns revolve around the accelerating pace of Trump's policies, including tariffs and layoffs, exacerbated by the absence of the "Trump put" [2][3] - Despite the overall stability of current U.S. economic data, increasing uncertainty may lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy of negative expectations [2][3] Group 2: Ideal Policy Pathway - Based on historical patterns during a new president's honeymoon period and midterm election preparations, the ideal policy pathway for Trump involves quickly implementing negative policies while maintaining a high tolerance for pain, followed by a gradual reduction of shocks and the introduction of positive policies like tax cuts [2][3][4] - The ideal pathway's realization depends on several assumptions, and the uncertainty surrounding Trump's policies may not dissipate quickly [3][4] Group 3: Trade and Non-Trade Policies - In trade, Trump's administration has initiated the "America First Trade Policy" memorandum, which aims to assess trade relations comprehensively, with conclusions expected by April 1 [5] - In non-trade areas, discussions within Trump's team regarding chip controls against China indicate a strong intent to enhance restrictions, which may impact certain re-exported goods from China [5] Group 4: Additional Hot Topics - The fluctuating nature of Trump's tariff threats has created ongoing market disturbances, with key upcoming dates being April 1 for the trade policy results and April 2 for details on "reciprocal tariffs" [6] - Progress in Russia-Ukraine negotiations and Europe's fiscal expansion are also noteworthy, as they may influence the political and economic landscape in the Eurozone [6] - The U.S. Congress has temporarily resolved a government shutdown crisis by passing a short-term spending bill, reflecting ongoing budgetary negotiations and potential resistance to Trump's fiscal policies [7]