Economy is roaring

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If the economy is so great, why are the budget and trade deficits at record levels?

Why are jobs still being outsourced to other countries?

Why is the infrastructure rotting?

I thought the Tax Cuts for Wealthy Donors and Jobs Act was supposed to fix everything?

Just be honest. It doesn't matter what objective macro economic numbers get put up, you'll just be always negative no matter what. It's hilarious how the fact that Americans are doing well bothers Democrats just because a Democrat isn't president. If the economy is so bad, then why do we have near record low rates of unemployment, a record setting market, a record setting black Friday, and a record setting cyber Monday, and very low inflation? People are very confident about this economy deposite Democrat bellyaching.

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/consumer-confidence

It must piss Dems off consumer confidence in this economy is outstanding and the highest it has ever been over the last decade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If the economy is so great, why are the budget and trade deficits at record levels?

Why are jobs still being outsourced to other countries?

Why is the infrastructure rotting?

I thought the Tax Cuts for Wealthy Donors and Jobs Act was supposed to fix everything?

The budget deficit is not at a record level. The highest deficits ever were in 2009, 2010 and 2011.

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/030515/which-united-states-presidents-have-run-largest-budget-deficits.asp

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Many people are very happy to see the market and economy exploding. And the Democrats are going to have a very difficult time ahead for themselves come 2020 on the issue of the economy. If Trump signs a Chinese trade deal, the markets are going to explode even more. We may have never seen a market and economy like this in American history if it keeps firing like this and at this rate if the trade deal also gets signed.

Since when is annual growth of under 3% considered an explosion? I'm pretty we've seen better. Much better.

And if, as you believe, the economy is doing so well, then why is Trump exploding the annual deficit (after Obama steadily reduced it over his eight years in office)?


Yes, he did. He spent so much in the first year on ARRA, that very slight drops year by year make your statement true (and worthless). He still spent like a drunken sailor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Many people are very happy to see the market and economy exploding. And the Democrats are going to have a very difficult time ahead for themselves come 2020 on the issue of the economy. If Trump signs a Chinese trade deal, the markets are going to explode even more. We may have never seen a market and economy like this in American history if it keeps firing like this and at this rate if the trade deal also gets signed.

Since when is annual growth of under 3% considered an explosion? I'm pretty we've seen better. Much better.

And if, as you believe, the economy is doing so well, then why is Trump exploding the annual deficit (after Obama steadily reduced it over his eight years in office)?

Percents are relative, genius.

It's much easier to grow an economy by 8-10% after it massively tanks or it is much smaller, than growing an economy that has a large GDP.

Go look up the following answers to these questions and post what you find here with cited sources.

What is the current unemployment rate and how does it compare to unemployment levels for the last 75 years?

At what percentage are real house hold incomes increasing or decreasing since 2016?

How much has the market grown since 2016?

How much has inflation been increasing over the last 4 years?

New poster. Why are you attributing these things to Trump? I know presidents often get blamed or credited for a good economy, but we know they often have a little tool to do with it, so why are you attributing this to Trump?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Many people are very happy to see the market and economy exploding. And the Democrats are going to have a very difficult time ahead for themselves come 2020 on the issue of the economy. If Trump signs a Chinese trade deal, the markets are going to explode even more. We may have never seen a market and economy like this in American history if it keeps firing like this and at this rate if the trade deal also gets signed.

Since when is annual growth of under 3% considered an explosion? I'm pretty we've seen better. Much better.

And if, as you believe, the economy is doing so well, then why is Trump exploding the annual deficit (after Obama steadily reduced it over his eight years in office)?

Percents are relative, genius.

It's much easier to grow an economy by 8-10% after it massively tanks or it is much smaller, than growing an economy that has a large GDP.

Go look up the following answers to these questions and post what you find here with cited sources.

What is the current unemployment rate and how does it compare to unemployment levels for the last 75 years?

At what percentage are real house hold incomes increasing or decreasing since 2016?

How much has the market grown since 2016?

How much has inflation been increasing over the last 4 years?

New poster. Why are you attributing these things to Trump? I know presidents often get blamed or credited for a good economy, but we know they often have a little tool to do with it, so why are you attributing this to Trump?

.

So vote for Trump if you want to, but your reason for doing so seems weak.

[Anonymous]

“One of the great enduring stupidities of the American presidential cult is the belief, rooted in invincible ignorance, that the state of the U.S. economy at any given moment is a reflection of the intelligence and wisdom of the chief executive of the federal government and a result of the excellence or insufficiency of his administration. “Sure, Bill Clinton may have been an intern-diddling hillbilly and maybe even a violent rapist, but, man, my IRA kicked ass in the 1990s!”


https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/11/presidents-do-not-control-economies-or-gdp/

[Anonymous]

One of the major reasons the stock market is higher is because there are 50% fewer companies than a few years ago. Plus instead of investing, the Tax Cuts for Wealthy Donors and Jobs Act resulted in massive stock buybacks vs. R & D?

Also, can we stop equating the unemployment rate with everything is groovy? My friend was earning $90K and know makes $60K. He isn't counted as unemployed but is hardly doing better. Of course his boss is doing A LOT better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The president has minimal impact on the stock market, so this is one of the dumbest threads ever.

Iti isn't about the stock market. It's about the economy. And, the president most certainly has an impact on the economy.

Well, the stock market is very much a reflection of the economy. Anyway, I'll listen to economists before I listen to people on the net trying to score points for their team.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:“One of the great enduring stupidities of the American presidential cult is the belief, rooted in invincible ignorance, that the state of the U.S. economy at any given moment is a reflection of the intelligence and wisdom of the chief executive of the federal government and a result of the excellence or insufficiency of his administration. “Sure, Bill Clinton may have been an intern-diddling hillbilly and maybe even a violent rapist, but, man, my IRA kicked ass in the 1990s!”


https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/11/presidents-do-not-control-economies-or-gdp/

“Trump is an economic illiterate with no substantive policy agenda at all.

But he will crow about that 3.3 percent GDP growth last quarter, and will insist that it is the result of his policies. Which of those policies, I wonder? He may get his tax cut, but, for the moment, Trump has done almost nothing of substance on the economy, and what his administration has done — a bit of excellent regulatory reform — is unlikely to affect growth dramatically in the short term. Regulatory reform is a good investment, but one with a long timeline for payoff. When you hear someone crediting a president with an economic boom or strong wage growth, ask them in some detail about the actual mechanism they believe to be at work, some plausible chain of causality. You’ll rarely get a satisfying answer.

Regulatory reform is a good investment, but one with a long timeline for payoff.

Presidents are one small piece of the public-policy picture — and public policy as a whole is only a small part of what shapes and moves a complex modern economy. “

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The president has minimal impact on the stock market, so this is one of the dumbest threads ever.

Iti isn't about the stock market. It's about the economy. And, the president most certainly has an impact on the economy.

Well, the stock market is very much a reflection of the economy. Anyway, I'll listen to economists before I listen to people on the net trying to score points for their team.

I am an independent and I think this is one of the stupidest threads I’ve read. Trump “policies” are a joke. But vote for him if you want, just understand that you might be giving him credit he isn’t due

[Anonymous]

How long will it take for the republican chamber of commerce and democrat elites to lament a worker shortage ???

[Anonymous]

Democrats have abandoned the middle class

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/12/09/massive-triumph-rich-illustrated-by-stunning-new-data/?utm_campaign=post_most&utm_medium=Email&utm_source=Newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&wpmm=1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Democrats have abandoned the middle class

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/12/09/massive-triumph-rich-illustrated-by-stunning-new-data/?utm_campaign=post_most&utm_medium=Email&utm_source=Newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&wpmm=1

There is no middle class

I don't want Yang to be President but he does have a point

Life will be awesome for the top 10% regardless

Life is a lot better for the bottom 25% then it was 4 years ago

The problem is the people in the 25-75% range. You can't expect the top 10% to pay for everything but there really aren't enough good jobs anymore for people in the 25-75% range. I'm talking jobs that pay 50-75k a year not the service sector jobs paying under 15 bucks an hour. Those jobs are plentiful but you can't live off that long term.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Democrats have abandoned the middle class

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/12/09/massive-triumph-rich-illustrated-by-stunning-new-data/?utm_campaign=post_most&utm_medium=Email&utm_source=Newsletter&wpisrc=nl_most&wpmm=1

There is no middle class

I don't want Yang to be President but he does have a point

Life will be awesome for the top 10% regardless

Life is a lot better for the bottom 25% then it was 4 years ago

The problem is the people in the 25-75% range. You can't expect the top 10% to pay for everything but there really aren't enough good jobs anymore for people in the 25-75% range. I'm talking jobs that pay 50-75k a year not the service sector jobs paying under 15 bucks an hour. Those jobs are plentiful but you can't live off that long term.

The richest 400 Americans have 2.9 trillion dollars. Now I’m terrible with math, and literally NO ONE is asking billionaires to give up all their money (no matter how much right wingers pretend), but how much does that work out to per American? They literally could pay for everything and considering that they’ve made most of their money of our hard work while chiseling more from us at every level - I’m fully on board with policies that demand them to have some skin in the game.

[Anonymous]

Corey Bookers plan is literally to give everyone $50,000 whenever they have a new kid. That absolutely SMACKS of entitlement and socialism. The Democrats need to come up with actual solutions that are economically viable instead of being intellectually lazy and just promising a whole bunch of free stuff that'll cost trillions of dollars. Where do people like AOC and the rest of the Democrats learn economics from, McDonald's?