The whole line is rotten, what do Wall Street bigwigs think of Trump tariffs?

This tariff turmoil exposed the impact of policy uncertainty on market confidence, and Wall Street rarely "collective complained". (Synopsis: Trump sacrifices 104% tariffs on China!) Bitcoin kills 75,000, Dow Jones open 1400 points higher and then falls, S&P loses 5000 mark) (Background added: Who is behind Trump to push tariffs: Navarro, economist Navarro, the "belligerent corner in the middle") Billionaire Bill Ackman, founder of Pershing Square, warned world leaders: "Don't wait for war to negotiate, call the president now." Ackerman's warning is not just an exaggeration – it's a plea. A few days ago, President Trump's tariff plan was like a bombshell, blowing up global markets, the US stock market lost $6 trillion in market value in a week, and the Dow Jones index hit its biggest intraday swing in history of 2595 points on Monday. Oil prices fell, interest rates fell, inflation worries lingered, and Trump confidently declared on Truth Social that "tariffs are a wonderful thing", but Wall Street giants couldn't sit still and opened the microphone, forming a symphony of Wall Street tariffs. On April 6, 2025, Ackerman tweeted: "By imposing massive and disproportionate tariffs on our friends and foes, we are simultaneously waging a global economic war against the whole world. We are heading for a self-induced economic nuclear winter." Ackman is not the only one sounding the alarm in the face of the Trump administration's escalating tariffs, and many Wall Street bigwigs have spoken out against expansionary tariffs, even if they have supported him or want deregulation and economic growth under his administration. Former Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein also asked, "Why not give them a chance?" He suggested that Trump should let countries negotiate "reciprocal" tariff rates. Boaz Weinstein, Gerber Kawasaki CEO and President Ross Gerber and JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon also spoke. Boaz Weinstein predicts that "the avalanche is really just beginning." "The sooner this problem is resolved, the better, because some negative effects accumulate over time and are difficult to reverse," Dimon bluntly said, warning that America's long-term economic union could be catastrophically divided. Gerber called U.S. President Donald Trump's tariffs "destructive," saying they could lead to a recession. It is clear that even the financial giants, accustomed to market volatility and even supporting Trump, are now beginning to worry that the tariff war could trigger an uncontrollable chain reaction. The growing criticism comes as Trump has provided no indication that he is ready to roll back punitive trade reforms scheduled to begin April 9. Markets can tolerate uncertainty, but they cannot tolerate "policy speculation" based on power. And Wall Street's collective voice this time just shows that capital is unwilling to pay for political gambling. Howard Marks, co-chairman of Oaktree Capital, noted in an interview with Bloomberg that tariffs have changed the established pattern of global trade and the economy, making the market environment more complex. Investors need to consider a range of unknown variables, such as inflation that tariffs can trigger, supply chain disruptions, retaliatory measures by trading partners, and the potential impact of these factors on economic growth and asset prices. Max's warning is a sign of anxiety across the professional investment community that even the most sophisticated fund managers must relearn how to bet on a global economic game when policy dominance prevails over market rules, traditional analytical frameworks are failing. On April 3, 2025, Wall Street's position on Trump's tariff policy was still divided. Bulls such as Fundstrat and Treasury Secretary Scott Bescent believe that the market's previous correction has been oversold and may trigger a "V-shaped rebound" once the policy direction is clear. Bears warned of heightened risks, Yardeni Research likened tariffs to a "destruction ball", Goldman Sachs raised the probability of a U.S. recession to 35%, LPL and Wedbush worried about the shadow of stagflation, pressure on corporate earnings and a blow to the auto industry. At the same time, neutrals put more emphasis on risk management, pointing out that some bearish bears have been priced in the market, and the subsequent trend depends on the enforcement of tariffs and the actual resilience of the manufacturing industry. However, as the market was violently shaken and panic heated up, the voices that still had a wait-and-see attitude began to turn, and the voices questioning Trump's tariff policy increased significantly. Despite Ken Fisher's relentless criticism of Trump's tariff plan introduced in early April as "stupid, wrong, and extremely arrogant," he remains consistently optimistic. He argues that "fear is often scarier than reality" and that the turmoil may be just a market correction similar to 1998, which could eventually lead to annualized returns of up to 26%. Steve Eisman, the prototype of the "Big Sell" known for the short-selling subprime crisis, warned that the market has not really reacted to the worst-case scenario of Trump's tariff policy, and it is not appropriate to "heroize" at this time. He bluntly said that Wall Street relied too much on the old formalization of "free trade is beneficial" and was inevitably at a loss in the face of a president who broke with tradition. He admits that he has also lost a lot from longing, pointing out that the market is full of "the resentment of losers". Eiseman also stressed that Wall Street should not be surprised that current policies seek to mend neglected groups under free trade, because Trump "has said he wants to do it for a long time, but no one takes it seriously." Amid the uproar, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent stressed that tariffs are essentially a bargaining chip to "maximize leverage" rather than long-term imposed economic barriers. "If tariffs are really that bad, why are our trading partners using them?" he asked. If it only hurts American consumers, why are they so nervous?" In his view, this is a counterattack against China's "low-cost, slave labor and subsidies" system. However, in reality, Bescent does not seem to play a key role in decision-making, more like a "spokesperson" used within the government to appease the market, and the sharp fluctuations caused by tariffs have actually caused alarm within the White House. This tariff turmoil exposed the impact of policy uncertainty on market confidence, and Wall Street rarely "collective complained". Regardless of their stance, most voices question and even outrage the radicality and sloppiness of the policy. Behind the disagreement is a general dissatisfaction with the logic of policy and the pace of implementation, and perhaps what should really be discussed is how confidence can be rebuilt in the chaos. Related reports Musk scolded Trump's tariff adviser: The head is stupider than a brick, Tesla's stock price has fallen by 40% this year Trump "simply miscalculated" the equivalent tariffs! AEI scholars exploded: tax rate irrigation 4 times, key parameters did not understand Foreign media exposed that Musk "privately lobbied Trump" to withdraw tariffs but failed, and the White House trade adviser: there is a problem with the brain 〈The whole line is rotten, what do Wall Street bigwigs think of Trump tariffs? This article was first published in BlockTempo's "Dynamic Trend - The Most Influential Blockchain News Media".