The Trump Presidency

0s2LIO6.gif
 
Left would rather talk about identify politics than yet another month of job and wage growth.

I get it. But damn it seems like y'all would get tired of it
 
sturg33 said:
Left would rather talk about identify politics than yet another month of job and wage growth.

I get it. But damn it seems like y'all would get tired of it
Click to expand...

I think it’s fair and honest to acknowledge the big-picture good economic numbers. In these discussions I’ve been focused on real wage growth and have been disappointed by its lagging, but I will say I’m glad to see some movement in that number, too.

But, damn, if we’re gonna be making entreaties for intellectual honesty, let’s all just admit we can read a graph and say that the current good times are a continuation of a trend. I think the markets were goosed by Trump’s election and the promise of tax cuts and deregulation, and I think that the tax cuts have made an impact (though one which may boomerang later) but this narrative that a President Clinton, or Sanders or Kasich or Cruz, wouldn’t be presiding over a healthy and growing economy bespeaks ingesting some fairly suspect kool-aid.

A lot of economists forecast that it would be at least 10-15 years before we fully shook off the effects of the credit crisis/housing market crash/Great Recession dated to 2007 or so.

I mean, damn, 57 wasn’t out here taking monthly victory laps on every scrap of news about growth and lower unemployment during the Obama years.
 
growth has accelerated...and I think fiscal stimulus and a reduced regulatory burden have contributed to it

2 caveats:

1) At this point of the cycle fiscal stimulus is probably not the right thing...not surprisingly inflation has been accelerating

2) There are some things not counted in GDP (examples: cleaner environment, better worker safety). We are giving up some of those for things that get measured in GDP. But to the extent the regulatory burden is being reduced in a smart way, the trade-off may be positive.
 
Last edited:
Julio3000 said:
I mean, damn, 57 wasn’t out here taking monthly victory laps on every scrap of news about growth and lower unemployment during the Obama years.
Click to expand...

I guess Trump's "non-fans" around here want to make sure he gets full credit for all of it plus the flowers in place of missiles at the North Korean parade. I mean it is unfair the rest of us don't appreciate the sharp intellect behind the policy shifts that have produced these results. Results on the ground mind you.
 
Julio3000 said:
I think it’s fair and honest to acknowledge the big-picture good economic numbers. In these discussions I’ve been focused on real wage growth and have been disappointed by its lagging, but I will say I’m glad to see some movement in that number, too.

But, damn, if we’re gonna be making entreaties for intellectual honesty, let’s all just admit we can read a graph and say that the current good times are a continuation of a trend. I think the markets were goosed by Trump’s election and the promise of tax cuts and deregulation, and I think that the tax cuts have made an impact (though one which may boomerang later) but this narrative that a President Clinton, or Sanders or Kasich or Cruz, wouldn’t be presiding over a healthy and growing economy bespeaks ingesting some fairly suspect kool-aid.

A lot of economists forecast that it would be at least 10-15 years before we fully shook off the effects of the credit crisis/housing market crash/Great Recession dated to 2007 or so.

I mean, damn, 57 wasn’t out here taking monthly victory laps on every scrap of news about growth and lower unemployment during the Obama years.
Click to expand...

I'm a little tired of having to explain the difference between the Obama economy and ours today.

Clearly, you all either don't understand the role the fed played, or you just don't think it mattered. Either way, I'm done trying to explain it
 
nsacpi said:
I guess Trump's "non-fans" around here want to make sure he gets full credit for all of it plus the flowers in place of missiles at the North Korean parade. I mean it is unfair the rest of us don't appreciate the sharp intellect behind the policy shifts that have produced these results. Results on the ground mind you.
Click to expand...

Yes I'd rather talk about results on the field than soap operas.

Just like I'd rather talk about Obama's results on the field rather than his charming respect for the office.

When Trump gets impeached for collusion I'll discuss that too
 
sturg33 said:
Yes I'd rather talk about results on the field than soap operas.

Just like I'd rather talk about Obama's results on the field rather than his charming respect for the office.

When Trump gets impeached for collusion I'll discuss that too
Click to expand...
it's fine to talk about results in the field...I desire to credit the wisdom of the current occupant of the oval office is the problematic part
 
Caligula's horse will always be Caligula's horse no matter how brilliantly the Roman economy performed during his time in office
 
sturg33 said:
I'm a little tired of having to explain the difference between the Obama economy and ours today.

Clearly, you all either don't understand the role the fed played, or you just don't think it mattered. Either way, I'm done trying to explain it
Click to expand...

Well, this is at least news to me in that I didn’t think you ever got tired of making specious arguments.

What claims can Trump make about the economy at this point that Obama couldn’t justifiably make? The unemployment rate? Consumer confidence? Do neither of those things have some relationship to the, like 75 consecutive months of job growth that occurred before Trump took office? 2.9% wage growth is worth a celebratory post now, but the same number doesn’t warrant it after the last quarter of the Obama presidency?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top