Author Topic: Trump’s Economy (merged)  (Read 34802 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Trump’s Economy (merged)
« Reply #375 on: August 28, 2018, 02:10:11 PM »

Offline gift

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1655
  • Tommy Points: 156
I was under the impression that most experts expected the stock market to surge after the election because investors knew that with a Republican Congress and Republican President, it was just about guaranteed corporations would get a huge tax cut and there would be a bunch of deregulation.
that's my recollection as well.

I think market experts probably expected that. I do remember political "experts" talking about instability.

Re: Trump’s Economy (merged)
« Reply #376 on: August 28, 2018, 02:25:55 PM »

Offline Donoghus

  • Global Moderator
  • Kevin McHale
  • ************************
  • Posts: 24559
  • Tommy Points: 1106
  • What a Pub Should Be
I was under the impression that most experts expected the stock market to surge after the election because investors knew that with a Republican Congress and Republican President, it was just about guaranteed corporations would get a huge tax cut and there would be a bunch of deregulation.
that's my recollection as well.

I think market experts probably expected that. I do remember political "experts" talking about instability.

For investors, it's be great so far.

I guess the question is; what about those people without portfolios? (And I don't know the answer to this).  How are they faring in this economy?


2010 CB Historical Draft - Best Overall Team

Re: Trump’s Economy (merged)
« Reply #377 on: August 28, 2018, 03:13:16 PM »

Offline gift

  • Don Chaney
  • *
  • Posts: 1655
  • Tommy Points: 156
I was under the impression that most experts expected the stock market to surge after the election because investors knew that with a Republican Congress and Republican President, it was just about guaranteed corporations would get a huge tax cut and there would be a bunch of deregulation.
that's my recollection as well.

I think market experts probably expected that. I do remember political "experts" talking about instability.

For investors, it's be great so far.

I guess the question is; what about those people without portfolios? (And I don't know the answer to this).  How are they faring in this economy?

I tend to think they are doing reasonably well at the moment. I don't think it's sustainable though.

Re: Trump’s Economy (merged)
« Reply #378 on: August 28, 2018, 05:20:44 PM »

Offline Vermont Green

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4308
  • Tommy Points: 358
Have we stopped talking about the Trump Mexico fabrication?  The WSJ is still talking about it:

Quote
The WSJ editorial board on Tuesday criticized President Trump over the trade deal he announced Monday with Mexico, calling it “notably worse in many ways” than the North American Free Trade Agreement.  The editorial board pointed to the exclusion of Canada from the deal as one of its shortcomings. The U.S. and Canada are still in negotiations.  To break up the current three-country trade agreement, Trump would need approval from Congress, something he is unlikely to get.

Another problem with the deal reached Monday, according to the Journal’s editorial board, is that it strips protections from most U.S. investors in Mexico. The editorial board also criticized the deal for imposing “new red tape and costs” on the auto industry, noting that the deal says that cars sold in North America need to have 75 percent of their content made there to avoid tariffs.  “This is politically managed trade, and its economic logic is the opposite of Mr. Trump’s domestic deregulation agenda,” the Journal wrote.

The upsides to the deal, in the Journal’s eyes, are that it “includes an extension on data protection for biologic drugs to 10 years from five” and it steps “back from its demand for a five-year ‘sunset’ that was essentially a backdoor way to dampen cross-border investment.”  Trump announced the deal from the White House on Monday, calling it a “big day for trade.”

Trump also cast doubt Monday on whether Canada would be included in a renegotiated deal. Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland will travel to Washington, D.C., on Tuesday for negotiations.

“The deal announced Monday has moving parts and there is still time to make improvements before it is signed and sent to Congress,” the Journal’s editorial board wrote. “We’re glad to see Mr. Trump step back from the suicide of Nafta withdrawal, but on the public evidence so far his new deal is worse.”

Re: Trump’s Economy (merged)
« Reply #379 on: August 28, 2018, 05:54:48 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 37435
  • Tommy Points: -27484
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
"Consumer Confidence" is just a poll of public opinion and not exactly cold, hard facts derived from analyzing the economy or the federal budget.

good news is always welcome but this is one measure to take with a grain of salt

Grain of salt?  Consumer confidence is considered one of the leading economic indicators.  High consumer confidence is great news for investors and for the economy as a whole, as it indicates that people are spending and intend to continue to spend.  Among other things, that leads to more taxable income, resulting in higher revenue for the government.
yes, grain of salt.  it is good news but it's used as supposition for more consumer spending and anticipated outcomes that are not guaranteed outcomes. 

It's not something that's derived from actual analysis such as a decreasing unemployment rate, increased earnings (corporate and/or personal), increased tax income, reduced spending in the budget, wage hikes, etc...  --> actual, tangible things. 

It's not a bad or negative thing by any means but I'll wait to see if any of the anticipated results of this confidence come to pass before getting overly excited. 
One question I would have is if there's an expected boost in consumer spending based on consumer opinion, I'm curious where that extra money for consumer spending is coming from considering there's been little wage growth.  Are consumers going to pile up more credit debt that may not be sustainable in the eventual economic downturn?  (No, I'm not saying there's going to be an economic downturn caused by any particular thing -- economies go in cycles so at some point this 10-year economic rise from the ashes is going to hit the inevitable bump in the road.)

The experts -- brokers, economic forecasters -- rely on this as a leading indicator.  Regardless of your opinion, this is undoubtedly an important predictor. 


Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: Trump’s Economy (merged)
« Reply #380 on: August 28, 2018, 06:10:48 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 37435
  • Tommy Points: -27484
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
Have we stopped talking about the Trump Mexico fabrication?  The WSJ is still talking about it:

Quote
The WSJ editorial board on Tuesday criticized President Trump over the trade deal he announced Monday with Mexico, calling it “notably worse in many ways” than the North American Free Trade Agreement.  The editorial board pointed to the exclusion of Canada from the deal as one of its shortcomings. The U.S. and Canada are still in negotiations.  To break up the current three-country trade agreement, Trump would need approval from Congress, something he is unlikely to get.

Another problem with the deal reached Monday, according to the Journal’s editorial board, is that it strips protections from most U.S. investors in Mexico. The editorial board also criticized the deal for imposing “new red tape and costs” on the auto industry, noting that the deal says that cars sold in North America need to have 75 percent of their content made there to avoid tariffs.  “This is politically managed trade, and its economic logic is the opposite of Mr. Trump’s domestic deregulation agenda,” the Journal wrote.

The upsides to the deal, in the Journal’s eyes, are that it “includes an extension on data protection for biologic drugs to 10 years from five” and it steps “back from its demand for a five-year ‘sunset’ that was essentially a backdoor way to dampen cross-border investment.”  Trump announced the deal from the White House on Monday, calling it a “big day for trade.”

Trump also cast doubt Monday on whether Canada would be included in a renegotiated deal. Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland will travel to Washington, D.C., on Tuesday for negotiations.

“The deal announced Monday has moving parts and there is still time to make improvements before it is signed and sent to Congress,” the Journal’s editorial board wrote. “We’re glad to see Mr. Trump step back from the suicide of Nafta withdrawal, but on the public evidence so far his new deal is worse.”

I think the first part is obvious, and perhaps not fair to the administration.  Yes, the deal is worse if Canada doesn't sign on to a trade agreement.  However, I think the expectation is that one will be hammered out somewhat soon.

The second point about red tape on the industry is a debatable one.  For the world as a whole, red tape related to trade is bad.  I would have liked to hear how this deal affects the U.S. individually, though.  It seems like the red tape is aimed at keeping manufacturing in North America (although not particularly in the United States, which is odd to me.)



Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: Trump’s Economy (merged)
« Reply #381 on: August 28, 2018, 06:14:48 PM »

Offline hpantazo

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18671
  • Tommy Points: 636
Have we stopped talking about the Trump Mexico fabrication?  The WSJ is still talking about it:

Quote
The WSJ editorial board on Tuesday criticized President Trump over the trade deal he announced Monday with Mexico, calling it “notably worse in many ways” than the North American Free Trade Agreement.  The editorial board pointed to the exclusion of Canada from the deal as one of its shortcomings. The U.S. and Canada are still in negotiations.  To break up the current three-country trade agreement, Trump would need approval from Congress, something he is unlikely to get.

Another problem with the deal reached Monday, according to the Journal’s editorial board, is that it strips protections from most U.S. investors in Mexico. The editorial board also criticized the deal for imposing “new red tape and costs” on the auto industry, noting that the deal says that cars sold in North America need to have 75 percent of their content made there to avoid tariffs.  “This is politically managed trade, and its economic logic is the opposite of Mr. Trump’s domestic deregulation agenda,” the Journal wrote.

The upsides to the deal, in the Journal’s eyes, are that it “includes an extension on data protection for biologic drugs to 10 years from five” and it steps “back from its demand for a five-year ‘sunset’ that was essentially a backdoor way to dampen cross-border investment.”  Trump announced the deal from the White House on Monday, calling it a “big day for trade.”

Trump also cast doubt Monday on whether Canada would be included in a renegotiated deal. Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland will travel to Washington, D.C., on Tuesday for negotiations.

“The deal announced Monday has moving parts and there is still time to make improvements before it is signed and sent to Congress,” the Journal’s editorial board wrote. “We’re glad to see Mr. Trump step back from the suicide of Nafta withdrawal, but on the public evidence so far his new deal is worse.”

Are we tired of 'winning' yet?

Re: Trump’s Economy (merged)
« Reply #382 on: August 28, 2018, 06:30:49 PM »

Online Neurotic Guy

  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14052
  • Tommy Points: 1548
I was under the impression that most experts expected the stock market to surge after the election because investors knew that with a Republican Congress and Republican President, it was just about guaranteed corporations would get a huge tax cut and there would be a bunch of deregulation.
that's my recollection as well.

I think market experts probably expected that. I do remember political "experts" talking about instability.

For investors, it's be great so far.

I guess the question is; what about those people without portfolios? (And I don't know the answer to this).  How are they faring in this economy?

I tend to think they are doing reasonably well at the moment. I don't think it's sustainable though.

I am sure many are doing better.  I'm not.  Worst year (income) in a long while for me in 2017, and 2018 looks even worse (self-employed; consultant).   I have very little invested, so the market uptick isn't very meaningful to me.  My home value increased -- but I don't realize any actual gain from that. I'll get some tax benefit from the tax changes, but offset by gas price rise and lower income.




Re: Trump’s Economy (merged)
« Reply #383 on: August 28, 2018, 06:54:43 PM »

Offline hpantazo

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18671
  • Tommy Points: 636
I think in the near future after the temporary tax cuts for normal folks expire and more government programs get cut, people are going to realize they were sold a flaming bag of poop by the current administration. Problem is, it will be too late then. Trump will be on to his second term.

Re: Trump’s Economy (merged)
« Reply #384 on: August 28, 2018, 08:50:42 PM »

Offline Vermont Green

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4308
  • Tommy Points: 358
Have we stopped talking about the Trump Mexico fabrication?  The WSJ is still talking about it:

Quote
The WSJ editorial board on Tuesday criticized President Trump over the trade deal he announced Monday with Mexico, calling it “notably worse in many ways” than the North American Free Trade Agreement.  The editorial board pointed to the exclusion of Canada from the deal as one of its shortcomings. The U.S. and Canada are still in negotiations.  To break up the current three-country trade agreement, Trump would need approval from Congress, something he is unlikely to get.

Another problem with the deal reached Monday, according to the Journal’s editorial board, is that it strips protections from most U.S. investors in Mexico. The editorial board also criticized the deal for imposing “new red tape and costs” on the auto industry, noting that the deal says that cars sold in North America need to have 75 percent of their content made there to avoid tariffs.  “This is politically managed trade, and its economic logic is the opposite of Mr. Trump’s domestic deregulation agenda,” the Journal wrote.

The upsides to the deal, in the Journal’s eyes, are that it “includes an extension on data protection for biologic drugs to 10 years from five” and it steps “back from its demand for a five-year ‘sunset’ that was essentially a backdoor way to dampen cross-border investment.”  Trump announced the deal from the White House on Monday, calling it a “big day for trade.”

Trump also cast doubt Monday on whether Canada would be included in a renegotiated deal. Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland will travel to Washington, D.C., on Tuesday for negotiations.

“The deal announced Monday has moving parts and there is still time to make improvements before it is signed and sent to Congress,” the Journal’s editorial board wrote. “We’re glad to see Mr. Trump step back from the suicide of Nafta withdrawal, but on the public evidence so far his new deal is worse.”

I think the first part is obvious, and perhaps not fair to the administration.  Yes, the deal is worse if Canada doesn't sign on to a trade agreement.  However, I think the expectation is that one will be hammered out somewhat soon.

The second point about red tape on the industry is a debatable one.  For the world as a whole, red tape related to trade is bad.  I would have liked to hear how this deal affects the U.S. individually, though.  It seems like the red tape is aimed at keeping manufacturing in North America (although not particularly in the United States, which is odd to me.)

You are missing the point.  The point is that Trump lied about this like he does everything.  But in spite of even conservative outlets like the WSJ saying the deal really isn't even a deal and even if it was, it is not all that good and certainly not what Trump described, they will believe that somehow Trump is great because he says so.

There is no replacement for NAFTA.  No deal is in place to replace NAFTA.  Trump lied about that.  And even the discussed terms of the deal that isn't even a deal yet, are mostly bad for America according to the WSJ Editorial Staff.  Don't over analyze this.  This isn't about whether this trade rule or that trade rule is good.  It is about how much Trump lies.

Re: Trump’s Economy (merged)
« Reply #385 on: August 28, 2018, 09:12:06 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 37435
  • Tommy Points: -27484
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
Have we stopped talking about the Trump Mexico fabrication?  The WSJ is still talking about it:

Quote
The WSJ editorial board on Tuesday criticized President Trump over the trade deal he announced Monday with Mexico, calling it “notably worse in many ways” than the North American Free Trade Agreement.  The editorial board pointed to the exclusion of Canada from the deal as one of its shortcomings. The U.S. and Canada are still in negotiations.  To break up the current three-country trade agreement, Trump would need approval from Congress, something he is unlikely to get.

Another problem with the deal reached Monday, according to the Journal’s editorial board, is that it strips protections from most U.S. investors in Mexico. The editorial board also criticized the deal for imposing “new red tape and costs” on the auto industry, noting that the deal says that cars sold in North America need to have 75 percent of their content made there to avoid tariffs.  “This is politically managed trade, and its economic logic is the opposite of Mr. Trump’s domestic deregulation agenda,” the Journal wrote.

The upsides to the deal, in the Journal’s eyes, are that it “includes an extension on data protection for biologic drugs to 10 years from five” and it steps “back from its demand for a five-year ‘sunset’ that was essentially a backdoor way to dampen cross-border investment.”  Trump announced the deal from the White House on Monday, calling it a “big day for trade.”

Trump also cast doubt Monday on whether Canada would be included in a renegotiated deal. Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland will travel to Washington, D.C., on Tuesday for negotiations.

“The deal announced Monday has moving parts and there is still time to make improvements before it is signed and sent to Congress,” the Journal’s editorial board wrote. “We’re glad to see Mr. Trump step back from the suicide of Nafta withdrawal, but on the public evidence so far his new deal is worse.”

I think the first part is obvious, and perhaps not fair to the administration.  Yes, the deal is worse if Canada doesn't sign on to a trade agreement.  However, I think the expectation is that one will be hammered out somewhat soon.

The second point about red tape on the industry is a debatable one.  For the world as a whole, red tape related to trade is bad.  I would have liked to hear how this deal affects the U.S. individually, though.  It seems like the red tape is aimed at keeping manufacturing in North America (although not particularly in the United States, which is odd to me.)

You are missing the point.  The point is that Trump lied about this like he does everything.  But in spite of even conservative outlets like the WSJ saying the deal really isn't even a deal and even if it was, it is not all that good and certainly not what Trump described, they will believe that somehow Trump is great because he says so.

There is no replacement for NAFTA.  No deal is in place to replace NAFTA.  Trump lied about that.  And even the discussed terms of the deal that isn't even a deal yet, are mostly bad for America according to the WSJ Editorial Staff.  Don't over analyze this.  This isn't about whether this trade rule or that trade rule is good.  It is about how much Trump lies.

1. He always lies. I’d rather look at the deal itself than what Trump says about the deal;

2. The WSJ isn’t conservative;

3. If Canada signs on, it’s an amendment to NAFTA


Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: Trump’s Economy (merged)
« Reply #386 on: August 28, 2018, 09:29:35 PM »

Offline Vermont Green

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4308
  • Tommy Points: 358
1. He always lies. I’d rather look at the deal itself than what Trump says about the deal;

2. The WSJ isn’t conservative;

3. If Canada signs on, it’s an amendment to NAFTA

So are you really suggesting that you are fine with the president lying about a trade deal (that isn't a deal but might be if Canada agrees at some time in the future) with an important ally?  And the WSJ is fake news now too, that their reporting isn't accurate or is biased?  You can't base anything on what is in the deal because it isn't a deal.  It is a framework.

This trade deal is not going to change squat.  It is a Trump distraction that you and many others are falling for.  Yeah, let's debate whether more regulations on trade are good or bad for American business while Trump and his family are fleecing America.  We are winning because Trump says we are winning.  Mexico promised to buy more from American farmers and someday they are going to pay for the wall (that came up again today too).  Yeah sure.

I know it is hard to let go.  I assume you supported Trump and to some extent still do.  You hoped and still hope that somehow Trump is going to usher in ideals that you support.  Be good for business or whatever.  But he isn't.  It is all a charade.

Re: Trump’s Economy (merged)
« Reply #387 on: August 28, 2018, 09:41:25 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 37435
  • Tommy Points: -27484
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
1. He always lies. I’d rather look at the deal itself than what Trump says about the deal;

2. The WSJ isn’t conservative;

3. If Canada signs on, it’s an amendment to NAFTA

So are you really suggesting that you are fine with the president lying about a trade deal (that isn't a deal but might be if Canada agrees at some time in the future) with an important ally?  And the WSJ is fake news now too, that their reporting isn't accurate or is biased?  You can't base anything on what is in the deal because it isn't a deal.  It is a framework.

This trade deal is not going to change squat.  It is a Trump distraction that you and many others are falling for.  Yeah, let's debate whether more regulations on trade are good or bad for American business while Trump and his family are fleecing America.  We are winning because Trump says we are winning.  Mexico promised to buy more from American farmers and someday they are going to pay for the wall (that came up again today too).  Yeah sure.

I know it is hard to let go.  I assume you supported Trump and to some extent still do.  You hoped and still hope that somehow Trump is going to usher in ideals that you support.  Be good for business or whatever.  But he isn't.  It is all a charade.

What is it about politics that causes people to jump to conclusions and put words in other people's mouths?

Where did I say I didn't have a problem with Trump lying?  Or that the WSJ is fake news?  Or all that nonsense in the last paragraph?

Trump lies.  In the next 2 to 6 years, he'll be out of office.  His words won't matter, but the deal itself will presumably be left behind.  That's why I'd rather look at whether it's actually good for the country, rather than focusing on Trump's spin.  He's going to make it out to be a fantastic deal.  His critics will reflexively bash him.  In between, there's the truth, which is what I choose to focus on.  To me, that's a more rationale approach than getting all worked up because Trump lied for the 25th time today.

I do disagree with that line about it being a charade that Trump is good for business.  I think that policies enacted in this administration have been very good for businesses.  We won't know the long-term consequences of those policies for a decade or so, but in the present, I don't think anybody would seriously say that businesses haven't been aided.


Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: Trump’s Economy (merged)
« Reply #388 on: August 28, 2018, 09:48:51 PM »

Online nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 35321
  • Tommy Points: 5861
Trump and all us can debate about whether Trump is lying or whether the deal is a good deal, but it still has to go through Congress to happen and from what I have read, it doesn't look like Trump will be able to push that through.

Re: Trump’s Economy (merged)
« Reply #389 on: August 28, 2018, 09:57:12 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 37435
  • Tommy Points: -27484
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
Trump and all us can debate about whether Trump is lying or whether the deal is a good deal, but it still has to go through Congress to happen and from what I have read, it doesn't look like Trump will be able to push that through.

It won't pass in its current framework, but as soon as Canada gets on board, it will be ratified.  Trump just doesn't have the votes to do a bi-lateral deal, unless he somehow convinces every Republican in Congress that the deal is necessary to get Canadian concessions.  Even then, I can't see some of the northern border Senators trusting Trump.


Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

 

Hello! Guest

Welcome to the CelticsStrong Forums.

Community

Signup to win FREE tickets

* indicates required