The Trump Economy

[Tiberius]

1 minute ago, Chef Jim said:

 

Seriously??  You have no clue that my post today was just mocking you when you posted that it was horrible day in the market in a thread about the economy?     Yeah  you suck real bad at this.  

 

Question:  How's the economy doing today?

I responded, right? 

 

Answer: nice 

[plenzmd1]

Again, my main issue with Trump has been and will continue to be the tax cuts and the deficit. Articles like this scare the poop out of me. Long term i just do not see the economy sustaining growth as  the deficit increases at record pace.

 

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ballooning-us-debt-like-boiling-frog-211753177.html

[Gavin in Va Beach]

2 minutes ago, plenzmd1 said:

Again, my main issue with Trump has been and will continue to be the tax cuts and the deficit. Articles like this scare the poop out of me. Long term i just do not see the economy sustaining growth as  the deficit increases at record pace.

 

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ballooning-us-debt-like-boiling-frog-211753177.html

 

Others here know the economy far better than I do, but when I read that tax revenue collected is higher than it's ever been I don't see that as an indictment of tax cuts but Congress's inability to reign in spending. This is the fault of both parties. Factor in the fact that one party is championing the idea we need more government healthcare, along with their mantra that all entitlements should never be cut but rather increased, and I'm not sure your issue is with Trump.

[plenzmd1]

27 minutes ago, Gavin in Va Beach said:

 

Others here know the economy far better than I do, but when I read that tax revenue collected is higher than it's ever been I don't see that as an indictment of tax cuts but Congress's inability to reign in spending. This is the fault of both parties. Factor in the fact that one party is championing the idea we need more government healthcare, along with their mantra that all entitlements should never be cut but rather increased, and I'm not sure your issue is with Trump.

Tax receipts on a year over year basis are declining ..please see attached link. https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/fsreports/rpt/mthTreasStmt/mts0918.pdf

 

Outside of April, when people were paying taxes based on 2017 income, every single month in  calendar year 2018, when the Trump tax cuts hit, revenue is lower compared to the corresponding month of 2017. Add into that Trump's huge uptick in governemnt spending and we have a massive swelling of the debt ..something usually not seen in "greatest economy ever  " periods. One usually associates a decrease in federal debt during great economic times.

 

I agree spending needs to come under control, and the issue i not  100% with Trump and Republicans, but  when he and his boys  like MMcConnell are already laying the groundwork for even bigger spending increases..that is not good for anyone on this board. Add into that his public statement he wants to cut taxes even further.ay yi yay

[Foxx]

2 hours ago, plenzmd1 said:

Again, my main issue with Trump has been and will continue to be the tax cuts and the deficit. Articles like this scare the poop out of me. Long term i just do not see the economy sustaining growth as  the deficit increases at record pace.

 

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ballooning-us-debt-like-boiling-frog-211753177.html

were it not for TARP and QE (insert whatever number makes you feel comfortable here (infinity)), i would tend to agree with you. however, i think both these programs, particularly QE smashed to hell any thought that you can't just print money (ie; entering 1's and 0's into a database). the old logical thinking would have dictated that printing that money would have come home to roost by now, that it hasn't, well........

Edited November 8, 2018 by Foxx

[TPS]

3 hours ago, plenzmd1 said:

Again, my main issue with Trump has been and will continue to be the tax cuts and the deficit. Articles like this scare the poop out of me. Long term i just do not see the economy sustaining growth as  the deficit increases at record pace.

 

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/ballooning-us-debt-like-boiling-frog-211753177.html

I've stated this a few times here: there is never a failed Treasury auction because the 23 Primary Dealer Banks are required to bid and fill it.  Take a look at any auction result and you'll see the tenders from the PDs exceed any Treasury offering, easily.

1 hour ago, Foxx said:

were it not for TARP and QE (insert whatever number makes you feel comfortable here (infinity)), i would tend to agree with you. however, i think both these programs, particularly QE smashed to hell any thought that you can't just print money (ie; entering 1's and 0's into a database). the old logical thinking would have dictated that printing that money would have come home to roost by now, that it hasn't, well........

Yes, I've had a lot of arguments here about the impact, or lack of, from QE on inflation....

Edited November 8, 2018 by TPS

[GG]

1 hour ago, TPS said:

 

Yes, I've had a lot of arguments here about the impact, or lack of, from QE on inflation....

 

It helps to own the world's reserve currency.  

 

No one else could get away with it.  

 

Now, I'd like to hear a counter argument why we don't need to police the world.  

[TPS]

12 minutes ago, GG said:

 

It helps to own the world's reserve currency.  

 

No one else could get away with it.  

 

Now, I'd like to hear a counter argument why we don't need to police the world.  

Not true. It helps to have a central bank that requires of its private banks they bid and fill the auction. Just look at the auction data. The cover to bid ratio is over 3, while it's being reported that foreign purchases are declining.

 

added: let me rephrase that, it may help, but it's not needed.

Edited November 8, 2018 by TPS

[IDBillzFan]

16 minutes ago, GG said:

 

It helps to own the world's reserve currency.  

 

No one else could get away with it.  

 

Now, I'd like to hear a counter argument why we don't need to police the world.  

 

I'm not worried. According to my BIL, we're going to avoid all of this by getting in on the ground floor of Initiative Q!

 

Who's with me? 

[/dev/null]

The next Chair of the House Financial Services Committee

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/nov/11/why-wall-street-must-get-ready-for-maxine-waters/

[BeginnersMind]

On 11/8/2018 at 4:28 PM, GG said:

 

It helps to own the world's reserve currency.  

 

No one else could get away with it.  

 

Now, I'd like to hear a counter argument why we don't need to police the world.  

 

 Isolationism is the ideal pushed by the new Rs these days. It hurts the brain to think how backwards it is.

 

The freakin Dems are more for free and open trade than the Rs who think we can bring back a manufacturing economy that is a) largely still here and b) gone in other respects for a reason. 

[Nanker]

Interesting to see the Left dropping their egalitarian mantra of “fair” and have replaced it with the socialist mantra of “free.”  

[Tiberius]

34 minutes ago, Nanker said:

Interesting to see the Left dropping their egalitarian mantra of “fair” and have replaced it with the socialist mantra of “free.”  

Your own fault. How does a political party blow an election with the best economy since...gees, ww2? You guys just totally suck 

[BeginnersMind]

32 minutes ago, Nanker said:

Interesting to see the Left dropping their egalitarian mantra of “fair” and have replaced it with the socialist mantra of “free.”  

 

Assume you're reacting to me mentioning free trade. That used to be a Republican ideal, and one I supported. 

 

The Dems don't want it but they are more for free trade than the Rs right now. I don't trust either side to support free trade because it costs some political capital. 

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

1 hour ago, BeginnersMind said:

 

 Isolationism is the ideal pushed by the new Rs these days. It hurts the brain to think how backwards it is.

 

The freakin Dems are more for free and open trade than the Rs who think we can bring back a manufacturing economy that is a) largely still here and b) gone in other respects for a reason. 

Spinning current buzz word "nationalism" into old buzz word "isolationism" may work for a beginner's mind, but not for those who pay attention to the world. 

 

It's akin to suggesting that the country needs to address a problem with  "illegal immigration" actually means am individual is against "legal immigration". 

 

I was reading the commentary of Peppe Le Macron chiding those who dare to consider the interests of their own country as part of their political agenda. Considering the current and future history of France, the fear over the Brits leaving the EU, and the general condition of Europe we should most certainly walk at a brisk pace in the opposite direction. 

 

 

[BeginnersMind]

1 minute ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Spinning current buzz word "nationalism" into old buzz word "isolationism" may work for a beginner's mind, but not for those who pay attention to the world. 

 

2

 

Bring manufacturing jobs home. We don't need other countries. Withdraw from multinational treaties and agreements. These are a weak intellectual arguments (not yours, but that come from the Twitter-sphere and meme-logic). 

 

Isolationism in the context of what Washington meant is irrelevant in 2018, so my use of the term is not meant to imply any equivalence. Washington, reading Hamilton's pen, was advocating a short-term isolationism in order for the fledgling country to have a chance at survival. It was excellent advice at the end of the 18th beginning of the 19th century but we outgrew it.

 

We don't have to be as linked as Europe because we have a natural isolation in the form of our oceans. But that doesn't mean that we should turn our backs on the benefits of free trade and good relations with other countries. 

[Tiberius]

Just now, BeginnersMind said:

 

Bring manufacturing jobs home. We don't need other countries. Withdraw from multinational treaties and agreements. These are a weak intellectual arguments (not yours, but that come from the Twitter-sphere and meme-logic). 

 

Isolationism in the context of what Washington meant is irrelevant in 2018, so my use of the term is not meant to imply any equivalence. Washington, reading Hamilton's pen, was advocating a short-term isolationism in order for the fledgling country to have a chance at survival. It was excellent advice at the end of the 18th beginning of the 19th century but we outgrew it.

 

We don't have to be as linked as Europe because we have a natural isolation in the form of our oceans. But that doesn't mean that we should turn our backs on the benefits of free trade and good relations with other countries. 

And Washington with Jay's treaty was opening up trade with other countries, not closing it off. We were the only Republican in the world at that that time. We should be supporting other republics today, not allowing out president to draw closer to any murderous dictator that offers him cash, hotels or praise 

[Tiberius]

[TakeYouToTasker]

48 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said:

 

Bring manufacturing jobs home. We don't need other countries. Withdraw from multinational treaties and agreements. These are a weak intellectual arguments (not yours, but that come from the Twitter-sphere and meme-logic). 

 

Isolationism in the context of what Washington meant is irrelevant in 2018, so my use of the term is not meant to imply any equivalence. Washington, reading Hamilton's pen, was advocating a short-term isolationism in order for the fledgling country to have a chance at survival. It was excellent advice at the end of the 18th beginning of the 19th century but we outgrew it.

 

We don't have to be as linked as Europe because we have a natural isolation in the form of our oceans. But that doesn't mean that we should turn our backs on the benefits of free trade and good relations with other countries. 

 

Words have meanings.  You don't get to determine isolationism means something new because it better suits your argument, and the word isolationism carries negative connotations.

 

Nothing being proposed is isolationism.

 

Bringing American steel back into the fold was a national security issue.

 

Withdrawing from multi-national treaties which don't work to the benefit of the United States is the job of a responsible Executive.  The United States should not be party to any agreements which don't directly benefit us.

 

Withdrawing from multi-national agreements is even more advantageous, because our law doesn't permit us to be party to agreements which are not ratified as treaties.

 

We do need other countries, but they need us more; and the relationship between us should reflect that.

 

Our relationship with Europe is past it's expiration date as written.  They attempted to help rig our most recent Presidential election through their Five Eyes involvement, which is an explicit act of war; and shirk their financial responsibility own national defense and UN funding, pinning us with the bill while they spend their own dollars propping up failing welfare states and chastising us at every turn.

 

As for free trade:  free trade is a two way street.  It is not beneficial for us to participate in free trade agreements with nations who are not reciprocating, because it puts us at a steep disadvantage.  Free trade is the most desirable, but there is not benefit to it until other countries tariff structures are broken.

 

 

 

 

Edited November 13, 2018 by TakeYouToTasker

[Rob's House]

President Trump is amazing. After only two years in office he's got liberals defending the constitution, supporting the military, and advocating free trade. The man is a genius.