The 2018 Trump Presidency thread

[Captain.Heroin]

Yeah, I was just checking my 401k. F'n hit hard. Wonder what's driving it though. Is it truly a bubble pop from Trump policies, or angst over upcoming elections (thought that might hit closer to Nov 6), or what? I'm sure media will spin it a dozen ways. Like anything, I'm here to ride it out.

"Terrorism" = they shut down the market or it crashes.

The stock market wants a slow steady rise. A bullish market has only backfired on us and we were blown out in space several times to suffocate to death. People don't remember the tech bubble? Or 9/11?

(The stock market was shut down for what was it, 5 days? and still went through a 1,400 point drop...)

The news about the banks isn't helping either.

Doesn't signify anything

"ISIS is in the caravans"... two minutes later "No proof..."

Donald DID make many claims about how beefed up the economy is and how he's its savior.

 

[|~~ANT~~|]

Regardless of whether or not he made claims, these fluctuations in DJ mean nothing.

teach us your ways ANT.

If you'd like to have an honest and open discussion about Trump's policies (relative to "normal" conservative policies) OR about the so-called damage Trump has done to the country or the planet OR about whether or not there is a deep-rooted anti-Republican bias - not only in this forum, but in mainstream media - that has existed for well over a decade... I'm happy to have the discussion, just let me know.

People largely make sarcastic comments and vaguely imply that Trump is bad. Let's break it down. I challenge you (or anyone here).

 

[alasdairm]

^ they mean something to trump.

he trumpets a blockbuster dow as evidence that the economy is great, everything is rosy, he's doing a great job and is responsible for all of it.

so the dow fell ~600 points today, erasing a year of gains. does that mean the economy is not doing as great as trump says, he's doing a poor job and he's responsible for this downturn?

cake and eat it...

alasdair

 

[|~~ANT~~|]

I don't agree with everything Trump says.
He's obviously an insecure man child with ego problems.

What he says has no impact on whether or not his presidency has aided the economy. Most economists say (at this point) that it has.

Happy to discuss it if you like.

 

[alasdairm]

well, if he's responsible when it soars, he's also responsible when it plummets.

but i doubt he'd - or many of his supporters would - agree.



alasdair

 

[Captain.Heroin]

these fluctuations in DJ mean nothing.

Especially if you're not personally invested in the stock market i.e. you've put your retirement or current $ into the market, speculating for short-term gains.

Oh wait, that doesn't apply to everyone..

^ they mean something to trump.

he trumpets a blockbuster dow as evidence that the economy is great, everything is rosy, he's doing a great job and is responsible for all of it.

so the dow fell ~600 points today, erasing a year of gains. does that mean the economy is not doing as great as trump says, he's doing a poor job and he's responsible for this downturn?

cake and eat it...

alasdair

Exactly. If the stock market was sooooooo strong, it wouldn't have such a massive crash (it also lost triple digit points in the preceding days; i.e. the news about the banks).

Most economists

^ obvious troll is obvious.

Economists always have differing opinions. Much like the political spectrum. Are you convinced most Americans voted for Donald Trump?

well, if he's responsible when it soars, he's also responsible when it plummets.

but i doubt he'd - or many of his supporters would - agree.



alasdair

qft

 

[|~~ANT~~|]

Especially if you're not personally invested in the stock market i.e. you've put your retirement or current $ into the market, speculating for short-term gains.

Oh wait, that doesn't apply to everyone..

Um, I'm saying it doesn't mean anything (relative to the stability/growth of the economy).

obvious troll is obvious.

People use the word troll to avoid having discussions they can't win. P.S. Calling someone a troll for making a statement about economists is basically an ad hom... isn't it?

Economists always have differing opinions. Much like the political spectrum.

I am an economist.

well, if he's responsible when it soars, he's also responsible when it plummets.

but i doubt he'd - or many of his supporters would - agree.

He's not responsible for either. It always fluctuates... These fluctuations have no bearing on his presidency and whether or not he has aided the US economy.

 

[Captain.Heroin]

I am an economist.

I said your statement was a troll. If you're an economist, you should know there's a plethora of opinions/criticisms of the way things are going right now. Many are skeptical of the short-term gains/manipulations Trump has programmed into our system. Some of us are hopeful the gains will be held long-term. It seems irrelevant when we have $20 trillion in nat'l debt, and this year added the better part of a trillion to it? It's not worth it. Trump is literally bankrupting the nation to make the rich richer.

Economists also have different philosophies. We are far away from a lassez-faire system that would optimize most of our problems. We haven't implemented a reasonable flat tax of 25+% on everyone. We have a pathetically low poverty level that needs to increase 10 fold. Corporations should have never seen a tax break from where Obama had things.

 

[|~~ANT~~|]

NSFW:

I said your statement was a troll.

That's just another blatant BS loophole you're using to bend the rules.

I didn't say all economists, I said most economists. This is based on direct interactions with other economists (online and in real life). It is also based on all available data. You can find anything you want on the internet, to support your argument. I don't believe I do this (with the economy, anyway). I read a lot, relevant to this discussion... Most economists means the majority of economists. That is, more than half. I'm yet to be presented with a sound argument indicating that Trump has harmed the US economy. Would you like to present one? (Those who do think Trump is harming the economy are, invariably, aggressively opposed to his presidency = conflict of interest.)

Trump is literally bankrupting the nation to make the rich richer.

He's doing what, now?

 

[Cream Gravy?]

^Well, he is bankrupting the nation in order to make the rich richer. That's 100% real and all that the tax reforms were about. They will not help the economy. The vast majority of Americans won't see any real breaks, especially after ten years. And we'll have less money to spend on necessary expenditures, therefore, more debt, therefore bankrupting us for his own selfish desires.

 

[|~~ANT~~|]

People say this about every conservative president (and some non conservative presidents). It's sensationalist nonsense. How is he "bankrupting the nation"? Will you be bankrupt by the end of his term? Will any of your friends or family? You don't get less money because there aren't tax cuts (you get the same amount as you used to) and a lack of tax cuts isn't going to bankrupt you. I wish Australia had the US tax bracket system (under Trump or any other recent president). If we did, I'd have shitloads more money to spend on "necessary expenditures".

*if you don't understand what I mean about Australia, google AUS tax rates and then google US tax rates.

I get that people want tax cuts - and maybe they deserve them - but pumping money into welfare systems and cutting low end tax rates doesn't stimulate the economy like reducing high end tax rates and promoting corporate/industry growth. This is why we need the right. But, if it was up to the right, the little people might be forgotten about... which is why we need the left.

 

[SheWasLvL18]

You're an economist that believes in trickle-down economics?

 

[Captain.Heroin]

I didn't say all economists, I said most economists. This is based on direct interactions with other economists (online and in real life). It is also based on all available data. You can find anything you want on the internet, to support your argument. I don't believe I do this (with the economy, anyway). I read a lot, relevant to this discussion... Most economists means the majority of economists. That is, more than half. I'm yet to be presented with a sound argument indicating that Trump has harmed the US economy. Would you like to present one? (Those who do think Trump is harming the economy are, invariably, aggressively opposed to his presidency = conflict of interest.)

Your #2 point: the budget deficit is severe. Fiscal conservatives are sickened by this kind of financial waste.

#1: Why is it even people like McConnell, and other Republicans speak out against the trade war with China? Did you hear about how the soybean farmers are suffering, or the Harley Davidson factories that are moving overseas because of Trump's actions?

Perpetual 4% unemployment, 10+% underemployment. People are not making living wages. Tax cuts to the wealthy and corporations while we're suffering? At a HUGE COST to the budget? No thank you. Fiscal conservatives or bring back the Democrats, please. Republicans *used* to care about being fiscally conservative. It's sad what's happened to their party.

Blowing up the budget is going to harm the economy down the road. I'm not going to take your opinion that you're an economist or have talked to enough economists to agree. I'm sure if your personal finances are doing well you are convinced, though.

1 day loss in the stock market wiped out all of 2018's gains. Enough said.

You're an economist that believes in trickle-down economics?

LOL yes and they think that "most other economists" really believe in that bullshit.

People say this about every conservative president (and some non conservative presidents). It's sensationalist nonsense. How is he "bankrupting the nation"? Will you be bankrupt by the end of his term? Will any of your friends or family? You don't get less money because there aren't tax cuts (you get the same amount as you used to) and a lack of tax cuts isn't going to bankrupt you. I wish Australia had the US tax bracket system (under Trump or any other recent president). If we did, I'd have shitloads more money to spend on "necessary expenditures".

*if you don't understand what I mean about Australia, google AUS tax rates and then google US tax rates.

I get that people want tax cuts - and maybe they deserve them - but pumping money into welfare systems and cutting low end tax rates doesn't stimulate the economy like reducing high end tax rates and promoting corporate/industry growth. This is why we need the right. But, if it was up to the right, the little people might be forgotten about... which is why we need the left.

Australia just needs a higher flat tax rate. The bracketing makes no sense and is fundamentally unfair and what is driving the poor to become poorer, the wealthy to get wealthier, and the middle class to shrink; mostly falling into the poorer class, and a few getting into the upper class.

This isn't a phenomena I would expect you'd observe if you weren't living here.

 

[JessFR]

Ignorant or educated, the anti-Republican bias is the bend of this sites political forum. It's like jumping into a frozen lake = you can decide to get out, or just get numb to it and try to swim. MOST of the posters are anti-Republican, but the nature of any political forum is that it needs people of all perspectives to try and enlighten one another with reason and facts, otherwise it becomes an echo chamber that may stroke your own beliefs, but never challenges them or helps you grow I will say, you may have a hard time pegging the forum as a whole, because people are all over the left half of the spectrum - there is a great variety in that sense.

Hah, yeah I've thought that a few times recently thanks to a couple posts of the "there is no left in America" variety. It's all relative. I tend to think even with no republican leaning people here we'd still find plenty to argue with. That's the problem with these kinds of ultra broad labels.

Really though, is this left wing bias really remotely surprising? This isn't a politics forum, I mean the CE&P subforum is, but the greater bluelight forum isn't. It's a drug support forum. And that's presumably the topic most people join for.

It's hardly surprising that many drug users would see the world in similar ways.

 

[|~~ANT~~|]

^What was the deficit like in the first 18 months of Obama's first term?

Perpetual 4% unemployment, 10+% underemployment.

You keep saying this in different threads. Unemployment in the United States is dropping under Trump. I don't give him credit for this. As I said, some presidents have more of an uphill battle than others. The country has it's own trajectory. Obama doesn't control these numbers and neither does Trump. Nobody does. There are thousands of factors involved.

Why is it even people like McConnell, and other Republicans speak out against the trade war with China?

People's opinions (republican or otherwise) have no bearing on the available data. Time will tell.

You're an economist that believes in trickle-down economics?

I wouldn't identify myself as a trickle-down economist, but I do see the value in tax cuts for businesses in certain situations. Every single economist in the world does. I am comfortable to identify as a an economist that believes tax cuts aren't designed to bankrupt countries and make the rich richer.

cutting low end tax rates doesn't stimulate the economy like reducing high end tax rates and promoting corporate/industry growth

Note the word "like". It was a comparative statement. Both left and right policies have a function. Often the left can't see the function of right-wing policies and the right can't see the function of left wing policies. I've never heard a sensible argument that pumping money into welfare systems or reducing low-end tax rates significantly stimulates the economy. But, I'm happy to listen if you have one. (There is certainly an argument to be made that taxing the rich at massive rates stimulates the economy, but that's not what I said.)

 

[Captain.Heroin]

^What was the deficit like in the first 18 months of Obama's first term?



[/COLOR]You keep saying this in different threads. Unemployment in the United States is dropping under Trump. I don't give him credit for this. As I said, some presidents have more of an uphill battle than others. The country has it's own trajectory. Obama doesn't control these numbers and neither does Trump. Nobody does. There are thousands of factors involved.



[/COLOR]People's opinions (republican or otherwise) have no bearing on the available data. Time will tell.



I wouldn't identify myself as a trickle-down economist, but I do see the value in tax cuts for businesses in certain situations. Every single economist in the world does. I am comfortable to identify as a an economist that believes tax cuts aren't designed to bankrupt countries and make the rich richer.



Note the word "like". It was a comparative statement. Both left and right policies have a function. Often the left can't see the function of right-wing policies and the right can't see the function of left wing policies. I've never heard a sensible argument that pumping money into welfare systems or reducing low-end tax rates significantly stimulates the economy. But, I'm happy to listen if you have one. (There is certainly an argument to be made that taxing the rich at massive rates stimulates the economy, but that's not what I said.)[/COLOR]

The statistics don't represent people who gave up looking for work. It is very hard to find work in the US right now. As admittedly you're not living here I wouldn't expect you to know that.

"Tons of jobs, no one to do them!" only applies in certain areas of the nation. You won't find that kind of drive to find workers in the big cities, etc.

The reason there's so much violence in certain communities, i.e. Chicago, is a perpetual lack of employment opportunities for people in these areas. It doesn't help that minimum wage raises normally mean eliminating entry-level positions. So naturally people turn to drug dealing to make a living, hence the violence. I'm not against drugs either; if that's how they want to make a living, go for it. Heroin's a great drug. The demand's there, so should be the supply. Simple economics.

 

[|~~ANT~~|]

I don't take anecdotal evidence seriously when it comes to analysing the economy.

Unemployment in Chicago may be a serious problem - I don't know anything about the city - but that doesn't mean that unemployment in the United States is worse under Trump... Is unemployment in Chicago really a result of the Trump administration? Or is it primarily due to other factors? Was it significantly lower during Obama? I'm happy to look into it, if you want to discuss it relative to the national economy. But, I seriously doubt it will have an impact on my opinion about Trump or the US economy at large.

It's entirely possible Trump has caused widespread unemployment in Chicago, but he hasn't caused an increase of unemployment in the country and that is what we are discussing.

 

[Captain.Heroin]

Many of us (even non-leftists like myself) will agree multiple administrations have failed to properly help Chicago, especially Trump.

Many have given up looking for work. #’s not truly reflected in unemployment stats.

 

[|~~ANT~~|]

#’s not truly reflected in unemployment stats.

Was it truly reflected under Obama?
What do you think the error margin is?

even non-leftists like myself

If you are right-leaning, I'm not sure (policy wise) what prevents you from at least feeling neutral about Trump. I've said this about half a dozen times, now: does anyone actually want discuss how his policies differ significantly from atypical conservative policies? Because, if they don't differ - significantly - anybody who thinks Trump followers are Nazis, basically think conservatives are Nazis right? And, if they don't differ significantly, what's the deal with all these conservatives hating on Trump?

He reminds me of that kid in school that everyone picked on. His dad is rich. He's socially awkward. He's weird looking... and, he's a bit of a prick. But is he a prick because he has a bad heart or is it a defence mechanism? When I was in primary school, I made fun of a couple of kids that everybody else was making fun of... and I've thought about that a lot. I don't think it's helpful. I don't think it's helpful to condemn Obama because he's black or condemn of old man Trump and all of his followers because he's orange / bald / and maybe a bit of a lunatic.

Trump was a wild card. Nobody knew what he was going to do. When he was elected, I was like - holy shit - and all these scenarios ran through my head. But, it was all blown way out of proportion. The left has been saying he's the devil since half way through his campaign and he's just not. The evidence isn't there. But, people have committed so much to this hateful rhetoric that they continue to treat him as if he is the devil they thought he would be.

 

[Captain.Heroin]

Nope; it was much higher then too. It's just a small improvement; nothing massive. Many people still underemployed.