First GDP month entirely under Trump...falling hard

James972 · Apr 10, 2017

ashurbanipal said:
I doubt very seriously guns would be necessary to do so.

keep dreaming!! a liberal is all about gun violence. Legal violence is the whole point of liberalism!! Free and voluntary relationships are what conservatives and libertarians stand for.

James972 · Apr 10, 2017

ashurbanipal said:
Anyway, "libnazi" isn't a word and it doesn't refer to anything.

our liberals spied for Hitler and Stalin and even gave Stalin the bomb!! Bernie honeymooned in the USSR and supports single payer communism!! Govt is bigger than ever and all liberals want is still bigger govt. Its never big enough for Stalin Hitler and our liberals. Do you know why?

James972 · Apr 10, 2017

DA60 said:
Imo, neither libs nor cons at the highest level have a blessed clue how to properly run America's economy.

cons support capitalism. Ever hear of Cuba/Florida?? Capitalism works better but liberals cant see the nose on their face.

James972 · Apr 10, 2017

DA60 said:
cons want bigger and bigger military budgets..

maybe so we can shoot down N Korea nukes aimed at us????? or shoot down Russian Migs over Syria if necessary or discourage China from further expansion?? or continue to be the world's policeman so civilization does not disappear tomorrow? Do you understand now?

James972 · Apr 10, 2017

ashurbanipal said:
I didn't say anything about setting prices, or about setting wages,

you said wages should be fair as if capitalism does not set fair wages and you want to step in at gunpoint to impose fair wages, and thus higher prices?

James972 · Apr 10, 2017

DA60 said:
Jeez man...you gotta learn to chill.

Every post you make seethes with anger and hatred.

.

too bad more people were not that way when the great 20th Century liberals Hitler, Stalin, and Mao were taking over.

James972 · Apr 10, 2017

ashurbanipal said:
I imagine if I were President people would think I'm anti-business for supporting the following notions:

1. People should be paid fairly, and what is fair is not determined by what those in power have dictated for a few years.

2. No one, businesses included, should not get away with poluting the environment wihtout paying for the damages.

3. Everyone should respect sovereign rights.

4. Businesses, along with everyone else, should pay their fair share of taxes.

5. Businesses should not be allowed to discriminate against people for what they do not choose, or what they have a right to choose.

6. Generally speaking, businesses should do the right thing, all of the time. At no time should businesses do what is wrong.

Frankly, I think it's nuts to suppose that someone who believes all of those things, and who believes in crafting laws and regulations in accord with those principles, is "anti-business."

But there are plenty of crazy people in the world...

wow, so you're for fair wages and taxes, against pollution and discrimination, for business doing the right thing and for respect?? I'll have to think about that. Its a lot to take in all at once.

James972 · Apr 10, 2017

ashurbanipal said:
Frankly, I think it's nuts to suppose that someone who believes all of those things, and who believes in crafting laws and regulations in accord with those principles, is "anti-business."
...

actually liberals are not for those things at all they are for Obamacommiecare, for example so that it can set fair wages, taxes prices etc. Now surely you understand?.

ashurbanipal · Apr 11, 2017

James972 said:
keep dreaming!! a liberal is all about gun violence. Legal violence is the whole point of liberalism!! Free and voluntary relationships are what conservatives and libertarians stand for.

I am a liberal, but I don't think that's the whole point of the things I'd like to do. I'm certainly not about "gun violence." I don't even own a gun.

James972 said:
our liberals spied for Hitler and Stalin and even gave Stalin the bomb!! Bernie honeymooned in the USSR and supports single payer communism!! Govt is bigger than ever and all liberals want is still bigger govt. Its never big enough for Stalin Hitler and our liberals. Do you know why?

No, I have no idea why. Perhaps you should explain.

James972 said:
you said wages should be fair as if capitalism does not set fair wages

What reason is there to think it does?

James972 said:
and you want to step in at gunpoint to impose fair wages, and thus higher prices?

Show me anywhere I said "I want to step in at gunpoint to make wages fair." I never said anything like that. I'd rather avoid that if possible, and I don't think it would be necessary in any case.

James972 said:
actually liberals are not for those things at all they are for Obamacommiecare, for example so that it can set fair wages, taxes prices etc. Now surely you understand?

I doubt very seriously I'm ever going to understand what motivates your posts.

PIPEWRENCH · Apr 11, 2017

Cigar said:
:mrgreen: ... and so the excuses continue.

I was going to blame Obama for every thing that goes wrong for the next 4 years the way the left blamed Bush when Obama was president.:thumbs:

The incoming president gets all the glory and the previous president gets all the blame. :lamo

Oh and it doesn't matter if either president had any control or influence over what happened. That is irrelevant. :lamo

PIPEWRENCH · Apr 11, 2017

Gonzo Rodeo said:
What's going to happen when there is a good quarter? "Oh, that? That is clearly Obama's doing." But a single month with a small return? "SEE!?! TRUMP IS RUINING EVERYTHING!!!!!"

Could you imagine being so prejudice that people believe this nonsense. Absolutely amazing.

PIPEWRENCH · Apr 11, 2017

Praxas said:
Well since we had the worst economic recession caused by your boy Bush, that would explain it. Yet you guys say the economy is booming now that Trump is elected but when the results come out, like his small hands, he comes up short. Make up your minds righties. Is Trump REALLY the cause or is it just continuing economics? I know you want Trump to walk on water, turn water into wine and part the red sea but that just ain't happening bub.

Sorry but the Messiah is no longer president.:lol:

PIPEWRENCH · Apr 11, 2017

ludin said:
you do realize that it is going to take at least a year or so to see the affect of anything trump does right?

And if he is a real good president with the future of this country as a priority it could be decades before we see the real effect of his work. The highway system is a prime example.

ocean515 · Apr 11, 2017

ashurbanipal said:
I would agree, and I think most reasonable people would agree, that it's too early to attribute any economic news, good or bad, to Trump's policies. The same principle applies at the beginning of every new administration--it takes at least a year for new policies to work themselves into the economy and have an effect. There could be some exceptions (for example, if a President ever fired all federal workers on the first day, we would rightly attribute the ensuing rise in unemployment to that act), but generally speaking, this is a good rule of thumb. For now, Obama and the previous two Congresses own all the economic news, good and bad. That becomes less and less the case as time wears on, and after roughly a year, Trump and the current congress own the economy, good and bad.

The point I was making is that some Trump supporters were cheering positive economic news from even before Trump was sworn into office as his doing. That's a pretty crazy view--there's been generally positive economic news for quite a while. But if that's the principle by which hard-core Trump supporters want to proceed, then they have to do so fairly, and own all the economic news, good and bad. I would agree it's a nonsense argument--but it's based on the same logic as the argument of the Trump supporters making claims that positive news is due to Trump's policies (or simply the superlative radiance of his being in office). If it's nonsense to blame the bad news on Trump, it must be nonsense to credit Trump with the good news as well.

Now, if you're saying there are partisan leftists who are so biased as to want to present this kind of argument in a positive light (see! Trump is wrecking the economy!), then I agree with you. There are such people on my side of the fence, and they're dumb-asses. I would not claim that all liberals are reasonable and all conservatives stupid. There are reasonable, intelligent people on both sides, and I maintain hope, despite present appearances, that perhaps those people will learn to talk to each other and we can come together as a nation.

I'm not sure I can engage when you seem compelled to such long winded replies. However, I'll give it a bit of a try.

There are certainly principles in business planning and development that require forward thinking. Promises of a better business climate in the future certainly can move the needle in the plus side of the dial, which shouldn't be dismissed out of hand.

The initial honeymoon period for new administrations has been eliminated and/or ignored by many who simply want to score political points.

While this can be entertaining as a point of discussion, it has little place objectively, and it will take quite some time for Federal Policies to actually impact bottom line numbers.

Again, it shouldn't be dismissed out of hand that business would respond to positive movement to improve business conditions, which most certainly can be attributed to President Trump.

To help support this suggestion, imagine the impact on business if a new President took office with a promise to apply draconian limits on business activity, and introduce a multitude of new restrictive regulations. Would an expected business retraction not be attributable to this new President?

ashurbanipal · Apr 11, 2017

ocean515 said:
I'm not sure I can engage when you seem compelled to such long winded replies. However, I'll give it a bit of a try.

I guess I'm a bit flabbergasted to see three paragraphs called "long winded..."

ocean515 said:
There are certainly principles in business planning and development that require forward thinking. Promises of a better business climate in the future certainly can move the needle in the plus side of the dial, which shouldn't be dismissed out of hand.

The initial honeymoon period for new administrations has been eliminated and/or ignored by many who simply want to score political points.

While this can be entertaining as a point of discussion, it has little place objectively, and it will take quite some time for Federal Policies to actually impact bottom line numbers.

Again, it shouldn't be dismissed out of hand that business would respond to positive movement to improve business conditions, which most certainly can be attributed to President Trump.

To help support this suggestion, imagine the impact on business if a new President took office with a promise to apply draconian limits on business activity, and introduce a multitude of new restrictive regulations. Would an expected business retraction not be attributable to this new President?

I made some allowance for that kind of thing in my earlier post; my point is that such examples are pretty rare. In an economy that has, for some time, seen similar good news to that which Trump supporters were cheering, it doesn't make much sense that suddenly that good news is due to Trump.

Lafayette · Apr 11, 2017

DA60 said:
The Atlanta Fed GDP Now numbers - which have been remarkably accurate in their relatively short history - are now putting the GDP at only 1.3%.

Not a good sign. Thoughts?

Remember, this is a "blue chip" forecast. Meaning it is comprised of only so-called "blue chip companies".

Not that such a warning is overly important, but blue-chips tend to do well in both good and bad times, so if they are on a down-slope things are going worse than one might expect.

Still, the warning does not seem to have had an impact on the stock market.

Any reasons why ... ?

Lafayette · Apr 11, 2017

Agreed, this administration is too early in its cycle for the forecast to have any real importance.

Still, neither is the forecast a "positive signal".

It'll take another 3 to 6 months to see a trend, if any appears. The economy could stagnate as well - after all, unemployment is at an all-time low. How do you expand an economy if unemployment is at rock-bottom. (By pulling in workers who were not signing-up for UI.)

It is only the Employment-to-population Ratio that is struggling to get back to its high in 2007/8 - and it has a long way to go. See here.

Lafayette · Apr 11, 2017

Gonzo Rodeo said:
What's going to happen when there is a good quarter? "Oh, that? That is clearly Obama's doing." But a single month with a small return? "SEE!?! TRUMP IS RUINING EVERYTHING!!!!!"

You're right. It is too soon to tell.

But what in the way of Economic Policy have you seen coming out that august-group of nerds inhabiting presently the White House?

Lafayette · Apr 11, 2017

ocean515 said:
I have no clue what you are going on about.

According to the other poster, it doesn't matter who did what before they took office. The moment they are sworn in, they own the economic performance of the country. Bush has no bearing on anything.

Perhaps people on the left can ask their propaganda wing to put out some clarifying instructions so all the folks in their bubble can be on the same page.

Look, enough of the propaganda.

Let's review Actual Economic History since Dubya's recession handed to Obama on a platter in 2008.

From there, in his first year in office, Obama and a Dem-Congress passed the ARRA-bill that spent $830B that successfully stopped an exploding unemployment rate at 10%. See here.

Then, when he wanted even more spending to bring the unemployment rate further down (in 2010), we jerks voted the Replicants into charge of the HofR. Who promptly refused any further stimulus-spending! (Under the silly guise of "Austerity Spending" because of America's "Debt Overhang".)

What happened? This (again from the BLS), the Employment-to-population Ratio:

latest_numbers_LNS12300000_2007_2017_all_period_M03_data.gif

The economy created NO JOBS from 2010 to 2014 - four longgggg years!

Wasn't that kinda stoopid? As an economics professor, I kinda-sorta qualify that as Stoopid Thinking To Spite a PotUS. (In hopes that you can sink him in the next election with high unemployment. But that ploy didn't work in 2012, did it?)

But explain that history to those who couldn't find jobs for four years ...

Lafayette · Apr 11, 2017

PIPEWRENCH said:
And if he is a real good president with the future of this country as a priority it could be decades before we see the real effect of his work. The highway system is a prime example.

That is not necessarily so.

Economic variations do not take THAT LONG to manifest themselves. Besides, The Donald has got it all wrong. Just like promising those jobs to coal-miners in West Virginia. (Coal usage is slumping - the jobs aint comin' back.)

Goods Production accounts for only 12% of all American jobs! If anything, the New Jobs will have to come from the Services Industry - because America has become a Services Economy. And, as we all should know, service-industry jobs are not as high-paying as were the Manufacturing Industry jobs that left the country by the boat-load for China and points East.

Big-Mouth has got a Big Problem - maybe that's why he plays so much golf nowadays ...

Lafayette · Apr 11, 2017

ocean515 said:
To help support this suggestion, imagine the impact on business if a new President took office with a promise to apply draconian limits on business activity, and introduce a multitude of new restrictive regulations. Would an expected business retraction not be attributable to this new President?

This is the same stoopid citation that is made by the Replicant crowd on this forum.

It's always the "draconian limites on business activities" that is reason for a down-turn or a slow up-turn.

it would help if you all took an economics course before commenting in an economics forum.

Unemployment is presently down to around 4.8% from an all-time high of 10% (spiked by Obama as soon as he came into office).

Just what sort of performance do you want from the economy? Miracles. Well, miracles really DON'T HAPPEN in economics. For the US to get the Employment-to-population Ratio back up to where it was in 2008 - see here - it is going to take one helluva lotta spending (and not just on Defense).

But on Education, because the jobs are NOT COMING out of Manufacturing but from the Services Industries. It is highly regrettable that our kids are not getting the sorts of qualifications necessary for Service Industry jobs. Namely, vocational and (at least) a 2-year degree.

And why is that happening. Because the cost of a postsecondary education is TOO DAMN EXPENSIVE. Those graduating find themselves with a $35K debt to repay ... !!!

AlbqOwl · Apr 11, 2017

DA60 said:
https://www.frbatlanta.org/cqer/research/gdpnow.aspx?panel=1

The Atlanta Fed GDP Now numbers - which have been remarkably accurate in their relatively short history - are now putting the GDP at only 1.3%.

Not a good sign.

Thoughts?

Once again, I have zero political loyalty to either a party or a movement.

A forecast is not the actual.

James972 · Apr 11, 2017

Lafayette said:
Unemployment is presently down to around 4.8% from an all-time high of 10% (spiked by Obama as soon as he came into office).

Just what sort of performance do you want from the economy?

actually people are working but for less pay than when Obama took office so that makes this worst recovery since Great Depression thanks to govt increasingly bogging down economy with some of the worst taxes and regulations in the world. We know from East /West Germany and 132 other examples that govt interfence with Republican capitalism makes people poor!!

James972 · Apr 11, 2017

Lafayette said:
Those graduating find themselves with a $35K debt to repay ... !!!

and what changed to make college so expensive?? Govt got involved and made a lot of money available which colleges took as higher tuition!! Capitalism makes people richer while socialism makes them poorer or causes high prices to make them poorer. Ever heard of Cuba/Florida or North Korea/South Korea??

iguanaman · Apr 11, 2017

DA60 said:
https://www.frbatlanta.org/cqer/research/gdpnow.aspx?panel=1

The Atlanta Fed GDP Now numbers - which have been remarkably accurate in their relatively short history - are now putting the GDP at only 1.3%.

Not a good sign.

Thoughts?

Once again, I have zero political loyalty to either a party or a movement.

I think that Trump and his GOP friends are going to put us into a recession. It is what business wants....wages are rising and they can't have that. If they get their BAT tax watch out.