nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
overwhelmingly so...things like relaxing regulations have some effect but much smaller and typically take more time to have an effect
Economics Thread
- Thread starter sturg33
- Start date
overwhelmingly so...things like relaxing regulations have some effect but much smaller and typically take more time to have an effect
Can you give details as to how the government borrowing money for the military and spcial security impact private sector growth (outside of the miltary industry?).
Why are professional services expanding greatly? Manufacturing?
acesfull86
Well-known member
Nothing is more frightening than Trump and Bernie being on the same side of an issue
Oklahomahawk
Boras' Client
Lol, I wonder which one of them would be the most freaked out when they look up and see who's agreeing with them on a major issue?
Reconfiguration of the supply chain. With the enhancement of automation china is losing their competitve edge in cost structure.
Im just wondering what other tactic could we use to get china to open their markets up?
https://www.ft.com/content/e7f02684-78a5-11e9-b0ec-7dff87b9a4a2?segmentId=957c4f0e-4bf3-a094-e9f5-03a132f5d75b
After the 2008 financial crisis, the US had one of the slowest economic recoveries in its history. Wages remained stagnant and the number of people on food stamp assistance programmes swelled to record numbers. During the same period, the Obama administration imposed more than $100bn annually in new regulatory costs, according to the Heritage Foundation. By 2016, nearly 74 per cent of American manufacturers reported that they were in an “unfavourable business climate”.
Their efforts are yielding substantial reductions in the regulatory state. In 2017, the Trump administration added 3,281 rules to the Federal Register, the fewest since records began in the 1970s. In the administration’s first 23 months, it issued 40 per cent fewer regulations compared with its two predecessors in the same period of time. It withdrew or delayed 1,579 rules from the Obama administration. OMB estimates that this has cut the federal regulatory budget by $33bn.
Lets continue to pretend that the current performance of the economy is a direct extension of the Obama years.
After the 2008 financial crisis, the US had one of the slowest economic recoveries in its history. Wages remained stagnant and the number of people on food stamp assistance programmes swelled to record numbers. During the same period, the Obama administration imposed more than $100bn annually in new regulatory costs, according to the Heritage Foundation. By 2016, nearly 74 per cent of American manufacturers reported that they were in an “unfavourable business climate”.
Their efforts are yielding substantial reductions in the regulatory state. In 2017, the Trump administration added 3,281 rules to the Federal Register, the fewest since records began in the 1970s. In the administration’s first 23 months, it issued 40 per cent fewer regulations compared with its two predecessors in the same period of time. It withdrew or delayed 1,579 rules from the Obama administration. OMB estimates that this has cut the federal regulatory budget by $33bn.
Lets continue to pretend that the current performance of the economy is a direct extension of the Obama years.
sturg33
I
It's funny I was actually having drinks with a muslim woman business owner today.
She told me she was voting for Trump because of his pro-business policies - that she was much better off today. and his anti-China efforts. Said the tariffs are costing her about 3% per year
She voted for HRC in 2016.
She told me she was voting for Trump because of his pro-business policies - that she was much better off today. and his anti-China efforts. Said the tariffs are costing her about 3% per year
She voted for HRC in 2016.
Tariffs are being absorbed more from suppliers. I do work with a beauty supply seller and the suppliers in China are being forced to lower their prices.
Don't believe the noise on the impact of the tariffs. China isn't a fair player and it was about time we had some leadership that was willing to stand up to them. It also helps that he was rich before and can't easily be purchased by the vast amount of 'investment' that China has into Washington.
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
Those stats seem awfully cherry picked and lacking in context. I am not going to defend his policies, I am just focusing on the results and using the measuring stick Trump uses for himself. Which is the stock market. Just as I defended GWB for inheriting a bad economy after the dot com bubble burst I defend Obama for inheriting a bad economy after the house bubble burst. In 1987 we had the crash as the end of the Reagan years. Where was the Obama crash? Surely its just a coincidence there was a big crash at the end of President's terms except Obama.
This administration has a completely different strategy in the Middle East and have clearly taken sides with the Sunni Muslim world. It may end up being the wrong gamble, even though there isn't a 'right' gamble. However, there are signs of modernization for the ruling elite more so than Iran which uses its proxies to devastate the middle east. You don't like it because it wasn't the prior administrations approach but this is all about strengthening the new order of alliances to fix the mess that was inherited.
Last edited:
You don't understand economic cycles very well it seems. A crash after the Obama years would have been unprecedented. Another unprecedented aspect was the weakness of his recovery. Almost everything they did with the economy failed and they made it so easy for a new administration that new how business works to unleash the economy.
zitothebrave
Connoisseur of Minors
You mean like how we had the dot com bubble burst then 7 years later had the mortgage bubble burst?
And what they did failed because they bailed out the bankers, if they had any nut they'd have taken over those banks like they did GM. Force them to operate fiscally sound. No golden parachutes or anything. All executives fired and we restart from there.
nsacpi
Expects Yuge Games
I commend you for setting a good example for thethe. May he follow in your footsteps.
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
I'll admit its not an area of strength for me in terms of understanding. What I do understand about the economy is that perception is everything in terms of the public view and is very susceptible to false propaganda. How does that cycle work with GWB? He entered right after the dot com bubble burst and 9/11 hurt hte economy, wouldnt it have been way too early for a crash by 2008?
In my research(google) looking for comparisons of the stock market under each Presidents I came across this.
https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2019/business/stock-market-by-president/index.html
I know first reaction is going to be attacking the source. Its far from the only one if you want more or you can just google it yourself. Can you explain to me what they are getting wrong?
cajunrevenge
Well-known member
I thought this was interesting given whats going on with China right now.