Terry Gilliam enjoys watching Donald Trump and Elon Musk argue 'like children in the playground'
The President of the United States and his former friend fell out recently over a proposed spending bill, with the pair taking shots at each other over the past few weeks.
Monty Python star Terry told Deadline: "I'm almost finding it enjoyable to listen to Trump and Musk go at each other like two children in the playground.
"It's the world's richest man and the world's most powerful man behaving like that."
Just this week, the 78-year-old commander-in-chief hit out at his former friend and advisor after the tech mogul declared his intention to start his own political party, the America Party.
Although Terry, AGE, admitted it's "fascinating", he did take aim at the way the Trump administration is trying to tackle immigration.
He added: "That's kind of fascinating and entertaining, and I think the idea of pushing all those people out of California, in all of America, that's the workforce folks, it isn't going to give more jobs to Americans.
"We need immigrants. The same thing happened when Britain left Europe."
The filmmaker - who was born in Minnesota, grew up in Los Angeles and later became a naturalised British citizied in 1968 - insisted he has no intention of living in the US again, having formally renounced his citizenship in 2006.
He said: "I haven't been back to [live in] America since whenever it was, and I don't intend to.
"I think America is in a very difficult position now because Trump and company are quite extraordinary.
"On the other hand, he may actually succeed where other people didn't, in a strange way. It's like Richard Nixon, you know, brought about the rapprochement with China."
Over the weekend, Tesla boss Musk revealed his plans to set up a political party to give people "back [their] freedom".
He wrote on X, which he owns : 'By a factor of 2 to 1, you want a new political party and you shall have it! When it comes to bankrupting our country with waste + graft, we live in a one-party system, not a democracy.
'Today, the America Party is formed to give you back your freedom.'
The president fired back on his own Truth Social platform: 'I am saddened to watch Elon Musk go completely 'off the rails,' essentially becoming a TRAIN WRECK over the past five weeks.
"He even wants to start a Third Political Party, despite the fact that they have never succeeded in the United States."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
7NEWS
12 minutes ago
- 7NEWS
US President Donald Trump sends more arms to Ukraine, says he is ‘not happy' with Vladimir Putin
US President Donald Trump says he has approved sending US defensive weapons to Ukraine and is considering additional sanctions on Moscow, underscoring his frustration with Russian President Vladimir Putin over the growing death toll in Russia's war with Ukraine. Trump, who pledged as a presidential candidate to end the war within a day, has not been able to follow through on that promise and efforts by his administration to broker peace have come up short. Trump directed his ire at Putin on Tuesday (Wednesday AEST) during a meeting with cabinet officials at the White House. 'I'm not happy with Putin. I can tell you that much right now,' Trump said, noting that Russian and Ukrainian soldiers were dying in the thousands. 'This is killing a lot of people. 'We get a lot of b******t thrown at us by Putin. ... He's very nice all the time, but it turns out to be meaningless.' Trump said he was considering whether to support a bill in the Senate that would impose steep sanctions on Russia over the war. 'I'm looking at it very strongly,' he said. The bill, whose lead sponsors are Republican Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina and Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut, would also punish other countries that trade with Moscow, imposing 500 per cent tariffs on nations that buy Russian oil, gas, uranium and other exports. Trump said on Monday that the United States would send more weapons to Ukraine, primarily defensive ones, to help it defend itself against Russian advances. On Tuesday, he said he had approved such a move. 'We're sending some defensive weapons to Ukraine, and I've approved that,' he said. A decision by the Pentagon to halt some shipments of critical weapons to Ukraine prompted warnings by Kyiv last week that the move would weaken its ability to defend against Russia's intensifying air strikes and battlefield advances. Trump, who was seated next to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, was asked on Tuesday who had ordered that pause. 'I don't know. Why don't you tell me?' Trump responded.
The Age
43 minutes ago
- The Age
The unintended consequences of Trump's copper tariff
The US has substantial reserves and resources of unmined copper, but only produced about half the 1.64 million tonnes of copper that it consumed last year. It gained another 150,000 or so tonnes from recycling but imported 810,000 tonnes of the refined metal. The challenge for the US is that it has copper in the ground but its smelting and refining capacity has shrunk over the past several decades. A slump in the copper price in the 1980s and 1990s led to the closure of US mines and smelters. In the late 1990s it still had 11 smelters in operation; today it has two, with a third that processes scrap. By contrast, China, which saw a strategic opportunity in the 1990s, made major investments in smelting and now has more than half the world's smelting capacity. Ore from the rest of the world is exported to China to be smelted and refined and then either increasingly consumed within China – which is leading the global electrification race – or re-exported. Given the centrality of copper to the 21st Century economy and advanced industrial and military technologies, China's dominance of the sector is obviously seen by the US as a national security threat. The obvious response would be to produce and process more of its own copper. The problem it has is that most of its undeveloped resources are on federal land, which creates challenging and very lengthy approval processes. The average time to bring a new US mine into operation has blown out to about 29 years. The giant Resolution copper project in Arizona owned by Rio Tinto and BHP, for instance, was discovered in 1995. Rio submitted a mine plan for the project, in which the companies have already invested several billion dollars, in 2013. It took until May this year for the US Supreme Court to clear the way for a land swap, opposed by native Americans, that will enable the project to proceed. It will take a decade or more to actually bring a mine into production. (BHP and Rio, via the giant Escondida mine in Chile will, incidentally, be exposed to the copper tariff, although more of that project's output is exported to Asia. Rio does have a mine – and a smelter – in the US that might benefit from the tariff and the higher domestic copper prices it will produce). Adding more domestic supply of copper might address the threat of supply shortages and the increasing reliance on Latin America (although the US has a free trade agreements with Chile, the major producer), but it doesn't solve the shortage of processing capacity. Loading Smelters take at least a decade and $US3 billion-plus of investment to construct and involve environmentally unfriendly processes, which is part of the explanation for why much of the global capacity migrated to China which, at the time, was more interested in economic and strategic benefits than its environment. Even if that capacity could be built in the US, it is unlikely to be competitive with China's smelters. China already has about 8 of the 20 largest copper smelters in the world. In the meantime, with the likelihood that Trump's new tariff will apply not only to imports of refined copper but downstream semi-fabricated products like copper sheeting and wire, US manufacturers reliant on copper will face a steep increase in costs. America's reliance on imported copper, once the tariff is in place, means that those manufacturers will not only incur higher costs that they will try to pass onto their own customers, but those costs will be unique to the US and therefore they will, to the extent that they compete outside the US or with imports, be at a significant competitive disadvantage. The ubiquity of copper usage means that will be an economy-wide issue, adding to inflation while damaging US competitiveness. That's a familiar aspect of Trump's trade war on the rest of the world. US copper buyers have already seen a preview of what's to come within the differential in US copper prices and those in the rest of the world as traders scrambled to get in ahead of the tariffs. That rush to get their hands on physical metal not only forced the copper price to record levels, but has inverted the normal futures price curve for copper, known as contango, where future prices are higher than the spot price to reflect the costs of storage, opportunity costs and risk. The price curve is now in 'backwardation' – spot prices are higher than future prices, with the prospect of losses for traders and hedged sellers of copper as their contracts expire and they are forced to cover their exposures at higher prices. The shortage of physical metal in the market, driven by the urgency of getting ahead of the tariff, could lead to even more price rises and market disruption as sellers that have to deliver physical copper try to cover their positions. Trump has claimed that 'trade wars are good and easy to win.' With copper, as with all of his other tariffs, he'll discover that they are nowhere near as straightforward as he has assumed, with hosts of unexpected and unintended consequences, some of them unpleasant and peculiarly so, not just for copper buyers and traders, but for US manufacturers and their customers.
Sydney Morning Herald
43 minutes ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
The unintended consequences of Trump's copper tariff
The US has substantial reserves and resources of unmined copper, but only produced about half the 1.64 million tonnes of copper that it consumed last year. It gained another 150,000 or so tonnes from recycling but imported 810,000 tonnes of the refined metal. The challenge for the US is that it has copper in the ground but its smelting and refining capacity has shrunk over the past several decades. A slump in the copper price in the 1980s and 1990s led to the closure of US mines and smelters. In the late 1990s it still had 11 smelters in operation; today it has two, with a third that processes scrap. By contrast, China, which saw a strategic opportunity in the 1990s, made major investments in smelting and now has more than half the world's smelting capacity. Ore from the rest of the world is exported to China to be smelted and refined and then either increasingly consumed within China – which is leading the global electrification race – or re-exported. Given the centrality of copper to the 21st Century economy and advanced industrial and military technologies, China's dominance of the sector is obviously seen by the US as a national security threat. The obvious response would be to produce and process more of its own copper. The problem it has is that most of its undeveloped resources are on federal land, which creates challenging and very lengthy approval processes. The average time to bring a new US mine into operation has blown out to about 29 years. The giant Resolution copper project in Arizona owned by Rio Tinto and BHP, for instance, was discovered in 1995. Rio submitted a mine plan for the project, in which the companies have already invested several billion dollars, in 2013. It took until May this year for the US Supreme Court to clear the way for a land swap, opposed by native Americans, that will enable the project to proceed. It will take a decade or more to actually bring a mine into production. (BHP and Rio, via the giant Escondida mine in Chile will, incidentally, be exposed to the copper tariff, although more of that project's output is exported to Asia. Rio does have a mine – and a smelter – in the US that might benefit from the tariff and the higher domestic copper prices it will produce). Adding more domestic supply of copper might address the threat of supply shortages and the increasing reliance on Latin America (although the US has a free trade agreements with Chile, the major producer), but it doesn't solve the shortage of processing capacity. Loading Smelters take at least a decade and $US3 billion-plus of investment to construct and involve environmentally unfriendly processes, which is part of the explanation for why much of the global capacity migrated to China which, at the time, was more interested in economic and strategic benefits than its environment. Even if that capacity could be built in the US, it is unlikely to be competitive with China's smelters. China already has about 8 of the 20 largest copper smelters in the world. In the meantime, with the likelihood that Trump's new tariff will apply not only to imports of refined copper but downstream semi-fabricated products like copper sheeting and wire, US manufacturers reliant on copper will face a steep increase in costs. America's reliance on imported copper, once the tariff is in place, means that those manufacturers will not only incur higher costs that they will try to pass onto their own customers, but those costs will be unique to the US and therefore they will, to the extent that they compete outside the US or with imports, be at a significant competitive disadvantage. The ubiquity of copper usage means that will be an economy-wide issue, adding to inflation while damaging US competitiveness. That's a familiar aspect of Trump's trade war on the rest of the world. US copper buyers have already seen a preview of what's to come within the differential in US copper prices and those in the rest of the world as traders scrambled to get in ahead of the tariffs. That rush to get their hands on physical metal not only forced the copper price to record levels, but has inverted the normal futures price curve for copper, known as contango, where future prices are higher than the spot price to reflect the costs of storage, opportunity costs and risk. The price curve is now in 'backwardation' – spot prices are higher than future prices, with the prospect of losses for traders and hedged sellers of copper as their contracts expire and they are forced to cover their exposures at higher prices. The shortage of physical metal in the market, driven by the urgency of getting ahead of the tariff, could lead to even more price rises and market disruption as sellers that have to deliver physical copper try to cover their positions. Trump has claimed that 'trade wars are good and easy to win.' With copper, as with all of his other tariffs, he'll discover that they are nowhere near as straightforward as he has assumed, with hosts of unexpected and unintended consequences, some of them unpleasant and peculiarly so, not just for copper buyers and traders, but for US manufacturers and their customers.
