Trump Thread 2.0

[Vincent Brick]

Frankly he’s better than Obama.

I am certainly no fan of the Obamas, but if you can seriously look around at the current state of this nation and still think this, you are a garbage person wholly lacking in values or morality. You are definitely no patriot.

[mbonder]

In general, when people taut what Trump has done over the last two years they tend to talk about the economy. Look at the run up after Trump was elected, look at the decreased taxes you're paying and how that's going to help the economy through the trickle-down effect.

Unfortunately, what was the case last year is quickly being erased. I can probably find at least a dozen instances where people lauded Trump because their 401k accounts were on the rise immediately after he came into office. Jobs were being created, the economy was growing at 4.2% (remember Trump's press conference about it?). Sadly, the economy is shrinking (next quarter projections are for 3.8% growth, although that number was released before the recent correction began).

So if the president has such a grand effect on the economy, and Trump's tax policies were so ingenius that the economy would continue to grow and create millions of jobs quarter over quarter, why are we now down 10% in 3 weeks? Can he just get on twitter or sign one of those fantastic executive orders to make my 401k rise once again?

I mention this because I believe it to all be a bunch of shit. On a personal level, I don't really care about much of what Trump has done in regard to immigration policy (the wall, the deportations, screaming about sanctuary cities), Supreme Court nominations (first one I thought ho hum, second one I thought was a closet alcoholic turned loony when pressed about it), slashing regulations (who needs them anyway, we're all going to be dead long before this place goes to shit anyway), foreign policy (NK is a farce, nothing happening there just like previous presidents).

Consequently, I haven't seen him as someone who has been successful as president in his first term because I don't really see that anything he's done in regard to the issues above or others not mentioned is all that important to my life. The one thing that did affect me in a real way was the economy and my ability to make money at a job and through investments. Last year I would have said economy awesome, Trump successful in that arena. This year, I'm saying economy not awesome, Trump not successful in that arena.

I would bet that many people feel the same way, which, if the economy continues it's slide toward 15-20% correction territory, is going to have a real affect on the midterms and what Trump is able to do for the remaining two years of his term in office and his potential for reelection.

On a side note, it is amazing to me that so much could possibly be decided in such a small amount of time. Literally, if the election was in September the economy looked a lot different than it does now only a month later at the end of October.

[CarpHunter]

Mbonder. I agree with you that the economy is a main driving factor in voting. But not in the way you state. It does have an effect on voter turnout, but not on voter choice. At the end of the day people are gonna vote for their party, not which candidate has the best fiscal policy. If people did in fact vote based on economic policy, then it would be safe to assume republicans would not be in power. As history has shown repeatedly, the actual outcomes of their policy is almost always negative. One only has to look back a few years to see what the outcome of the current policy will be. It's called Kansas.

The other thing I feel you mistake is the economy vs the stock market. You mention your 401k and investments. These are part of the stock market, not the economy. The market is based purely on speculation, while the economy is based on actual demand for goods, which is controlled by actual buying power/earnings. The boom in the market was driven by the speculation that trump would be business friendly, ie market friendly. Along with the promise of large tax breaks. The market responded accordingly, after all it was sure bet. This drove investment into the market, but not by more people, just more money. But none of this money went into the actual economy, just the market.

The economy on the other hand changed very little. Almost all jobs created were low paying or part time. No real investment into the economy occurred. Simply because the actual earnings of people didn't change very much. Sure there was the propaganda of a few bonuses here and there, however no real wage growth occurred. While businesses received huge tax cuts that allowed them to increase the level of stock but backs, thereby artificially increasing their stock price and market worth. The people of this country saw no real change in take home pay, thus no real change to their buying power. So with no increase in buying power there was no real increase in demand, thus no real increase in the economy.

The markets are dropping now in response to the fact that no real economic growth occured. The bubble that trump blew up is starting to deflate. The economic reality of the tax cuts is starting to come out. The tariffs I feel are simply speeding the process.

[supermansocks95]

Mbonder. I agree with you that the economy is a main driving factor in voting. But not in the way you state. It does have an effect on voter turnout, but not on voter choice. At the end of the day people are gonna vote for their party, not which candidate has the best fiscal policy. If people did in fact vote based on economic policy, then it would be safe to assume republicans would not be in power. As history has shown repeatedly, the actual outcomes of their policy is almost always negative. One only has to look back a few years to see what the outcome of the current policy will be. It's called Kansas.

The other thing I feel you mistake is the economy vs the stock market. You mention your 401k and investments. These are part of the stock market, not the economy. The market is based purely on speculation, while the economy is based on actual demand for goods, which is controlled by actual buying power/earnings. The boom in the market was driven by the speculation that trump would be business friendly, ie market friendly. Along with the promise of large tax breaks. The market responded accordingly, after all it was sure bet. This drove investment into the market, but not by more people, just more money. But none of this money went into the actual economy, just the market.

The economy on the other hand changed very little. Almost all jobs created were low paying or part time. No real investment into the economy occurred. Simply because the actual earnings of people didn't change very much. Sure there was the propaganda of a few bonuses here and there, however no real wage growth occurred. While businesses received huge tax cuts that allowed them to increase the level of stock but backs, thereby artificially increasing their stock price and market worth. The people of this country saw no real change in take home pay, thus no real change to their buying power. So with no increase in buying power there was no real increase in demand, thus no real increase in the economy.

The markets are dropping now in response to the fact that no real economic growth occured. The bubble that trump blew up is starting to deflate. The economic reality of the tax cuts is starting to come out. The tariffs I feel are simply speeding the process.

Thank you for some actual good information. I'm sick of hearing that he fixed the economy. I live in Kansas and can confirm as well.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

[mbonder]

Yes I agree, the stock market and the economy aren't the same thing, but they are connected. I was trying to be somewhat tongue-in-cheek by conflating the two, because that's exactly what most people tend to do, which I find to be annoying.

[gwb72tii]

what would have been the better alternative?
not being sarcastic, genuinely wondering

Alternative to ? Several points being made.

How can anyone actually believe the money sent to Iran was not a bribe to release hostages? It happened nearly at the same exact minute we got our citizens back

[gwb72tii]

Yes I agree, the stock market and the economy aren't the same thing, but they are connected. I was trying to be somewhat tongue-in-cheek by conflating the two, because that's exactly what most people tend to do, which I find to be annoying.

Markets down because forward looking revenues are light which is a surprise to Wall Street, and a growing concern the the Fed is raising interest rates too fast.

Any president that hitches his wagon to the stock market is going to be disappointed.

[gwb72tii]

Thank you for some actual good information. I'm sick of hearing that he fixed the economy. I live in Kansas and can confirm as well.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk

By any measure the economy is better since his policies went into effect. Maybe not for you and Kansas.

[Massive Lee]

Cheetos is either uneducated, misinformed or a blatant liar...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2018/10/30/trump-says-no-other-country-has-birthright-citizenship-hes-wrong/?utm_term=.07fa74122165

"Trump says no other country has birthright citizenship.

He’s wrong.

At least 30 countries subscribe to the principle of jus soli, wherein a person’s citizenship is based on the territory of his or her birth. Simply put, birthright citizenship. Jus soli is law in Canada, the United States and nearly every country in South and Central America.

In Europe, 8 countries (Belgium, Finland, France, Greece, Italy, Netherlands, Spain and the United Kingdom) have strong jus soli dispositions, where children born from foreign parents can acquire nationality quite easily... "

[Schnitzer318is]

Mbonder. I agree with you that the economy is a main driving factor in voting. But not in the way you state. It does have an effect on voter turnout, but not on voter choice. At the end of the day people are gonna vote for their party, not which candidate has the best fiscal policy. If people did in fact vote based on economic policy, then it would be safe to assume republicans would not be in power. As history has shown repeatedly, the actual outcomes of their policy is almost always negative. One only has to look back a few years to see what the outcome of the current policy will be. It's called Kansas....

Thank you! Well executed post, and spot on. This is why Trump is focusing on immigration "invasions" and the Democratic bogeyman. He has not accomplished anything yet except working on undoing the jobs growth (shitty jobs) that occurred after Obama. The market is correcting it looks like based on the lack of actual growth and the tariffs are probably part of that. As for the tax cuts for average Americans... I'll let you know come March.

And again, I'm no Obama fan... But I'll take him over the cheeto in chief any day of the week.

[mbonder]

By any measure the economy is better since his policies went into effect. Maybe not for you and Kansas.

Need to explain how it's better?

These tariffs are costing some American companies tons of money, those costs being passed on to the consumer.

In a general sense, Trump is arguing for lower taxes to put money into the pockets of Americans, but then driving the cost of goods up that those same Americans would buy. Doesn't make much sense to me, at best it would seem to indicate a neutral effect on regular people.

I just find it interesting that people will argue that the tariffs are good because they have the potential to drive down the cost of American goods, meaning that American companies may be able to hire more workers and therefore people that were unemployed may now be employed.

Isn't this a form of socialism? Government tinkering with private industry? I thought the Republicans were for Free Market, little to no government intervention?

Same goes for all those subsidies that are being handed out to farmers affected by some of these tariffs and trade policies.

[gwb72tii]

Need to explain how it's better?

These tariffs are costing some American companies tons of money, those costs being passed on to the consumer.

In a general sense, Trump is arguing for lower taxes to put money into the pockets of Americans, but then driving the cost of goods up that those same Americans would buy. Doesn't make much sense to me, at best it would seem to indicate a neutral effect on regular people.

I just find it interesting that people will argue that the tariffs are good because they have the potential to drive down the cost of American goods, meaning that American companies may be able to hire more workers and therefore people that were unemployed may now be employed.

Isn't this a form of socialism? Government tinkering with private industry? I thought the Republicans were for Free Market, little to no government intervention?

Same goes for all those subsidies that are being handed out to farmers affected by some of these tariffs and trade policies.

without arguing about the corporate and personal tax cut timing (IMHO bad), the affect has been an acceleration in GDP, job growth and higher wage growth. Those are the numbers. Arguing it's a result of Obama policies is ludicrous.

Tariffs being imposed have the potential to create havoc economically as it looks for now that China isn't going to cooperate and Trump is serious. One reason for the weakness in the markets is the looming threat of China actually slowing economically because of the effect of tariffs on prices of goods sold in the USA. We also just saw numbers on EU GDP that were below expectations. None of this is good for stocks.

I'd argue it isn't socialist as the government is not controlling the means of production. Tariffs and subsidies distort the cost of goods sold so it's impossible to have true price discovery.

[z31maniac]

You're right gwb, for instance, American Steel companies have not just raised their prices to match the tariffs. Ford Motor Company didn't come out and say that US steel is now some of the most expensive in the world.

The personal tax cuts and increase in defense spending haven't massively grown the deficit to the point that McConnell is now asking for more Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid cuts.


None of the things I mentioned in this post have happened in the last 10 months.

[gwb72tii]

Cheetos is either uneducated, misinformed or a blatant liar...

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2018/10/30/trump-says-no-other-country-has-birthright-citizenship-hes-wrong/?utm_term=.07fa74122165

"Trump says no other country has birthright citizenship.

He’s wrong.

At least 30 countries subscribe to the principle of jus soli, wherein a person’s citizenship is based on the territory of his or her birth. Simply put, birthright citizenship. Jus soli is law in Canada, the United States and nearly every country in South and Central America.

In Europe, 8 countries (Belgium, Finland, France, Greece, Italy, Netherlands, Spain and the United Kingdom) have strong jus soli dispositions, where children born from foreign parents can acquire nationality quite easily... "

So if a Kenyan entered Canada illegally and gave birth to a boy, he's Canadian? Key word being illegal? Trump is arguing this point, if you're here illegally you do not get US citizenship by being born in the US.

And you do know "jus soli" was not US policy before i think 1960? It is not in our constitution.

[gwb72tii]

You're right gwb, for instance, American Steel companies have not just raised their prices to match the tariffs. Ford Motor Company didn't come out and say that US steel is now some of the most expensive in the world.

The personal tax cuts and increase in defense spending haven't massively grown the deficit to the point that McConnell is now asking for more Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid cuts.


None of the things I mentioned in this post have happened in the last 10 months.

Tax receipts at the federal level are at record highs. It has never been about tax rates, it has always been federal spending.

There is a big moment of truth coming in the next few years about global debt levels.