• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

My thoughts about Trump

code1211 said:
The financial markets were in the dumper when Bush left office due to the Real Estate Bubble having burst. The parts of the engine were still there, but the engine had stopped running.

The conditions that led to this were put in place by every President and Congress dating back to the 30's. Bill Clinton signed the bill that was the final repeal of Glass-Steagall. Enter the age of the Sub-Prime borrower. This was a social engineering approach to lending that allowed people unqualified to borrow money to get loans.

The resulting loans were defaulted but the lending institutions sold the bad loans representing them as assets with value as parts of "bundles". The purchasing institutions did not perform their due diligence and put their investors at risk. Does this make Clinton the perp in this little crime drama? No more, in my opinion, than any lawmaker back through the Great Depression.

The Burst Bubble was the result of 80 years of greedy law makers and do-gooder law makers all making bad policy, doing wrong things and setting the stage for the eventual calamity for their own reasons. NOBODY ESCAPES BLAME. That said, the bankers were deceptive thieves playing musical chairs hoping to not be the one left standing when the music stopped.

Obama was in office during a time of market rise. Getting back to the peak of 2007 required 5 years of businesses fighting head winds.


Dow Jones - 100 Year Historical Chart | MacroTrends
[FONT="][h=1]Dow Jones - 100 Year Historical Chart[/h]Interactive chart of the Dow Jones Industrial Average stock market index for the last 100 years. Historical data is inflation-adjusted using the headline CPI and each data point represents the month-end closing value. The current month is updated on an hourly basis with today's latest value. The current price of the Dow Jones Industrial Average as of August 11, 2017 is 21,889.87.


[/FONT][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#555555][FONT="]
Show Recessions Log Scale Inflation-Adjusted​
[FONT="][/FONT] Download Data [FONT="][/FONT] Export Image
Click in chart area to zoom or select date range: 5 Years | 10 Years | 20 Years | 30 Years | All Years​
Click to expand...


Bill Clinton signed the bill that was the final repeal of Glass-Steagall.
Click to expand...

Well I will give you credit for blaming everyone, when discussing the crash I find that unusual with Cons. I applaud you for that.

And true it was Clinton who signed the repeal Glass-Steagall. The name of that bill was Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act. All 3 of those names are Republican Senators. so yes, I agree with you, BOTH parties deserve blame, as do the greedy bankers, the lying rating agencies and even the borrowers. Wall Street started to lobby for deregulation in early 80's, and by the 90's they got their wish. And because the GOP is dying to deregulate Wall Street again, I can see another crash in the future.

BTW I did not blame Bush for the crash, he deserves some blame, but not all of it, not even close. There's was plenty of blame to go around for everyone involved. I said the recession started on his watch, in Dec. 2007 IIRC. Even before the crash the economy was weakening, but Trump is getting an economy that's still going good.
 
SenorXm/Sirius said:
Well I will give you credit for blaming everyone, when discussing the crash I find that unusual with Cons. I applaud you for that.

And true it was Clinton who signed the repeal Glass-Steagall. The name of that bill was Gramm–Leach–Bliley Act. All 3 of those names are Republican Senators. so yes, I agree with you, BOTH parties deserve blame, as do the greedy bankers, the lying rating agencies and even the borrowers. Wall Street started to lobby for deregulation in early 80's, and by the 90's they got their wish. And because the GOP is dying to deregulate Wall Street again, I can see another crash in the future.

BTW I did not blame Bush for the crash, he deserves some blame, but not all of it, not even close. There's was plenty of blame to go around for everyone involved. I said the recession started on his watch, in Dec. 2007 IIRC. Even before the crash the economy was weakening, but Trump is getting an economy that's still going good.
Click to expand...

Grouping me in with "Cons"? Interesting. What are my beliefs on abortion, regulation of drugs, immigration and superiority of one party over the other that cause you do this?

Fairly recently, another do-gooder recommendation to relax standards for Sub Prime borrowers was advanced by some Democrat. Insanity.

Stupidity in Washington DC is like water in a river. Sometimes it flows rapidly and sometimes it flows slowly, but it seems to always flow and carries whatever is in it along with it.

Absent Political Party loyalty, can you imagine anyone arguing in favor of the ACA cobbled together by the Democrats or the mish mash replacement cobbled together by the Republicans?

It's like they're arguing over which pile of dog poop they should spread on the sandwich they will force down our collective throat.
 
katzgar said:
Incorrect you're pulling a trump TV stunt here
Click to expand...

EVERY stock index has posted 30 to 40 record closes since the election. This includes the DOW.

The DOW is up 4000 points in 9 months. This is about 444 points increased per month.

Contrast that with the Obama election day to election day gain of about 9700 points across 8 years. This is about 100 plus points per month.

Given the pit at which the measure starts for the Obama period measured, this increase is not that great.

Just getting back to point at which the decline started required 5 years.

This not opinion. This is statement of the DJI Average over the years.

As far as the economy goes, it seems hard to gauge exactly the measure that makes any difference except at the ballot box.

When the population feels good, they tend to reaffirm the guys in power. Reagan's landslide and Clinton's as well in the second term elections for both.

When something is not right, the population withdraws that affirmation.

As shown in the last election, something was not right.

Dow Jones - 100 Year Historical Chart | MacroTrends
 
code1211 said:
Grouping me in with "Cons"? Interesting. What are my beliefs on abortion, regulation of drugs, immigration and superiority of one party over the other that cause you do this?

Fairly recently, another do-gooder recommendation to relax standards for Sub Prime borrowers was advanced by some Democrat. Insanity.

Stupidity in Washington DC is like water in a river. Sometimes it flows rapidly and sometimes it flows slowly, but it seems to always flow and carries whatever is in it along with it.

Absent Political Party loyalty, can you imagine anyone arguing in favor of the ACA cobbled together by the Democrats or the mish mash replacement cobbled together by the Republicans?

It's like they're arguing over which pile of dog poop they should spread on the sandwich they will force down our collective throat.
Click to expand...

Your 'lean' says conservative. Thus my grouping with Cons.
 
code1211 said:
EVERY stock index has posted 30 to 40 record closes since the election. This includes the DOW.

The DOW is up 4000 points in 9 months. This is about 444 points increased per month.

Contrast that with the Obama election day to election day gain of about 9700 points across 8 years. This is about 100 plus points per month.

Given the pit at which the measure starts for the Obama period measured, this increase is not that great.

Just getting back to point at which the decline started required 5 years.

This not opinion. This is statement of the DJI Average over the years.

As far as the economy goes, it seems hard to gauge exactly the measure that makes any difference except at the ballot box.

When the population feels good, they tend to reaffirm the guys in power. Reagan's landslide and Clinton's as well in the second term elections for both.

When something is not right, the population withdraws that affirmation.

As shown in the last election, something was not right.

Dow Jones - 100 Year Historical Chart | MacroTrends
Click to expand...


trumps dow is just mediocre How Trump?s stock market ranks during his first 100 days in office - MarketWatch
 
katzgar said:
trumps dow is just mediocre How Trump?s stock market ranks during his first 100 days in office - MarketWatch
Click to expand...

Um...

The first 100 days was over more than 100 days ago.

About 4 trillion dollars have been added to the markets since election day.

CNN says that the rise in the markets over the first 100 days is second only to JFK. Both, incidentally, advanced similar ideas across various topics.

I'm not familiar with the economist you link to, but I am thankful at least that you did not use Krugman.

http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/28/investing/trump-rally-wall-street-100-days/index.html
 
Occasionally when a civilization is falling apart there are enough adults left to step in and make a course correction. This explains the last election. The unicorn mentality of much of the population combined with the self-serving malfeasance of a corrupt political establishment was taking us down fast. The spread of nuclear armaments to Iran and North Korea through the inaction of our leadership has set us on a path that could result in the end of life as we know it. Alarmingly a significant percentage of the population is so cognitively attenuated that they believe out of fairness every country should have nuclear weapons. This kind of kindergarten intelligence is lethal. Most of these people see Trump as a threat to their meal-ticket lifestyles which is why they hate him more than the concentration camps they would be living in if they were located in some of these hellholes. There is an adult in the White House now
 
code1211 said:
In specific, what defines for you my "lean".
Click to expand...

I was specially talking about the 2008 crash, and I don't think I am exaggerating but at least 95% of all Cons I have talked to over the years believe the crash was 100% the fault of the Dems, or 100% the fault of the borrowers, or 50-50% blame between the Dems and borrowers. They do NOT believe The GOP, the banks, the rating agencies, the bankers, the Mortgage Banks, the predatory lending, the flat out fraud and forgery, the greed, etc. deserve any blame.

That's why you got lumped into the Con group on this particular topic. Obviously on this topic you are not a typical Con.
 
code1211 said:
EVERY stock index has posted 30 to 40 record closes since the election. This includes the DOW.

The DOW is up 4000 points in 9 months. This is about 444 points increased per month.

Contrast that with the Obama election day to election day gain of about 9700 points across 8 years. This is about 100 plus points per month.

Given the pit at which the measure starts for the Obama period measured, this increase is not that great.

Just getting back to point at which the decline started required 5 years.

This not opinion. This is statement of the DJI Average over the years.

As far as the economy goes, it seems hard to gauge exactly the measure that makes any difference except at the ballot box.

When the population feels good, they tend to reaffirm the guys in power. Reagan's landslide and Clinton's as well in the second term elections for both.

When something is not right, the population withdraws that affirmation.

As shown in the last election, something was not right.

Dow Jones - 100 Year Historical Chart | MacroTrends
Click to expand...


more trump tv. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...conomy/the-economy-under-president-trump.html
 
katzgar said:
more trump tv. https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...conomy/the-economy-under-president-trump.html
Click to expand...

NONE of Trump's economic policies have been put into effect yet. There are two financial factors that may be attributed to Trump:

1. He has been cancelling regulations at the the rate of 16 cancelled for every one implemented since his inauguration.

2. He has PROMISED to work to undo the punitive tax policies that are hindering the decisions of people to locate or expand their businesses in the US.

It is unlikely that the unemployment rate has had much of a benefit from Trump policies at this point in time. Same is true of GDP, wages and employment participation. These were cited in your link. Did I mention any of these in my post?

The unemployment rate will impact the wage rate if it remains low as employers try to get anyone to come through the door to apply for work.

This has been true for decades in my experience.

The participation rate will also increase if the wage rates, rising to attract employees, become too high to be ignored by those who have left the work force. Additional measures of a tighter work force will be enhanced benefits and perks offered by employers and not mandated by government.

These are lagging indicators.

The Stock and Commodity Markets are a measure of hope held by investors.
 
code1211 said:
NONE of Trump's economic policies have been put into effect yet. There are two financial factors that may be attributed to Trump:

1. He has been cancelling regulations at the the rate of 16 cancelled for every one implemented since his inauguration.

2. He has PROMISED to work to undo the punitive tax policies that are hindering the decisions of people to locate or expand their businesses in the US.

It is unlikely that the unemployment rate has had much of a benefit from Trump policies at this point in time. Same is true of GDP, wages and employment participation. These were cited in your link. Did I mention any of these in my post?

The unemployment rate will impact the wage rate if it remains low as employers try to get anyone to come through the door to apply for work.

This has been true for decades in my experience.

The participation rate will also increase if the wage rates, rising to attract employees, become too high to be ignored by those who have left the work force. Additional measures of a tighter work force will be enhanced benefits and perks offered by employers and not mandated by government.

These are lagging indicators.

The Stock and Commodity Markets are a measure of hope held by investors.
Click to expand...


in other words he has had no effect on the economy
 
code1211 said:
Bush rescued the Financial Industry With the part of the TARP that he spent.

He left the other half of those monies for his successor to use as he saw fit. Obama made the Auto industry Bail Outs.

The Financial industry paid back the loans with a small profit. Most of the institutions to which the monies were given did not need or want them, but the Government did not want to erode the confidence in any of the institutions so they all had to get their share.

The Government did not enjoy the same success in receiving payment on the loans to the Auto Industry.

However, the dealings involving money with those that know how to hide those dealings are pretty murky. Between the government, the Fed, big business, big unions and the financial institutions, the main goal is to mask the actual deals. The real goal(s) is to skim as much money off the top as can be skimmed without going to jail.

https://www.thebalance.com/auto-industry-bailout-gm-ford-chrysler-3305670

Barack Obama says banks paid back all the federal bailout money | PolitiFact New Hampshire
Click to expand...

According to a 2008 article Honda and Toyota were also hoping the US companies would recieve an auto bailout so they could keep plants in the U?S.

The Detroit 3 , US Honda , and Toyota are inter connected. They share the suppliers and if GM and Chrysler failed then the auto parts suppliers would most likely would have also failed causing the US Honda & US Toyota to close thier US factories.

In that scenario all of our autos would be imports.

Take a look at this article:

Why Toyota wants GM to be saved
A GM failure would cause production problems, crush already weak demand and potentially open the door to low-cost competitors.

Last Updated: December 16, 2008: 9:53 AM ET


NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Detroit's Big Three aren't the only automotive companies that want to see the government step in with some much-needed financial help.

Overseas automakers, most notably Toyota Motor, all endorse some form of federal aid to keep General Motors (GM, Fortune 500), Chrysler LLC and possibly Ford Motor (F, Fortune 500) out of bankruptcy.

The Senate killed an effort to get the automakers a stopgap loan last week and now the Bush administration has said it is looking at providing the automakers help from the $700 billion approved to bail out banks and Wall Street firms.

"We support measures to help the industry," said Toyota Motor (TM) spokeswoman Mira Sleilati. "We just want a strong, competitive healthy industry."

This may seem surprising at first, especially considering that much of the opposition to the auto bailout was from senators from Southern states that are home to auto plants operated by Asian auto companies, such as Alabama and South Carolina. But the Asian automakers insist they never lobbied against such help for the Big Three.

And this makes sense after taking a closer look at the dynamics of the auto industry and the intertwined fates of its companies.

Here's why Toyota, Honda Motor (HMC) and other Asian auto manufacturers clearly believe they are all better off if GM and Chrysler survive.

Collateral damage

The overseas automakers, who between them produce more than 3 million vehicles a year at U.S. plants, all worry their production would be hurt if one of the U.S. automakers went under. That's because a Big Three failure would likely lead to widespread bankruptcies in the auto parts supplier industry.

Erich Merkle, lead auto analyst with the consulting firm Crowe Horwath LLP, said there is much overlap between the automakers' suppliers. Since most parts in an automobile have only a single supplier producing them, the disruptions in production will be severe and prolonged.

"It could take months for a Toyota to work through that and resume normal production," he said.

Merkle said the current network of auto suppliers, manufacturers and dealerships has worked well for the overseas automakers, who have posted steady gains in their U.S. market share during the past few years.

Besides sharing suppliers, many dealers sell both U.S. and overseas brands. So the failure of a U.S. automaker could hurt the overseas manufacturers' dealer network and their sales as well, Merkle said.

"There would be a severe disturbance in the force," he quipped.

Economic shockwaves
A collapse of one of the Big Three would also probably cause an even more severe hit to the U.S. economy. That would further eat into demand for U.S. auto sales, which hit a 26-year low in November.

"The U.S. economy would be in shambles," Merkle said. "The robust U.S. economy that Toyota and the others depend on would suddenly not be as lucrative." <SNIP>
Click to expand...

Why Asian automakers want a federal bailout of U.S. industry - Dec. 15, 2008
 
Last edited:
katzgar said:
in other words he has had no effect on the economy
Click to expand...

Obviously, his ideas have had a dramatic effect on the stock markets which increases personal wealth.

Personal wealth has a two fold effect.

One is a feeling of personal optimism and accomplishment.

A lagging impact could be an injection of cash into the economy. Interesting to me was that personal income decreased by a smidgeon in June, but a majority of trade numbers improved. This could be a connection to Trump. Maybe not...

With a decrease in personal income, one might expect a decrease in personal spending. Not the case. Retail sales are down a bit, but international trade deficit has improved, residential construction is up, residential housing sales are up, exports up and imports down, service industry sales are down.

All of that said, consumer confidence is up to a 16 year high.

While the Democrats are trying to stop everything and the Republicans are unable to move anything, Trump continues to preach optimism.

One political party is impotent and the other is ineffective. Both are bumbling groups of meandering swindlers that are depressing to even look at.

However, something is helping the economy. If that something is from the world of politics, with BOTH political parties having disqualified themselves from consideration, there really aren't that many other options to consider.

Thinking that it's Trump doesn't seem to be a far reach.

Do you have any links to support your favored idea as to what's currently impacting the numbers?

https://www.commerce.gov/economicindicators

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/27/june-us-consumer-confidence.html
 
code1211 said:
Obviously, his ideas have had a dramatic effect on the stock markets which increases personal wealth.

Personal wealth has a two fold effect.

One is a feeling of personal optimism and accomplishment.

A lagging impact could be an injection of cash into the economy. Interesting to me was that personal income decreased by a smidgeon in June, but a majority of trade numbers improved. This could be a connection to Trump. Maybe not...

With a decrease in personal income, one might expect a decrease in personal spending. Not the case. Retail sales are down a bit, but international trade deficit has improved, residential construction is up, residential housing sales are up, exports up and imports down, service industry sales are down.

All of that said, consumer confidence is up to a 16 year high.

While the Democrats are trying to stop everything and the Republicans are unable to move anything, Trump continues to preach optimism.

One political party is impotent and the other is ineffective. Both are bumbling groups of meandering swindlers that are depressing to even look at.

However, something is helping the economy. If that something is from the world of politics, with BOTH political parties having disqualified themselves from consideration, there really aren't that many other options to consider.

Thinking that it's Trump doesn't seem to be a far reach.

Do you have any links to support your favored idea as to what's currently impacting the numbers?

https://www.commerce.gov/economicindicators

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/27/june-us-consumer-confidence.html
Click to expand...


your post is just a desperate attempt to pretend trump is worth a ****...he isnt.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/08/buffett-says-trump-hasnt-had-much-effect-on-the-economy-yet.html
 
minnie616 said:
According to a 2008 article Honda and Toyota were also hoping the US companies would recieve an auto bailout so they could keep plants in the U?S.

The Detroit 3 , US Honda , and Toyota are inter connected. They share the suppliers and if GM and Chrysler failed then the auto parts suppliers would most likely would have also failed causing the US Honda & US Toyota to close thier US factories.

In that scenario all of our autos would be imports.

Take a look at this article:


Why Asian automakers want a federal bailout of U.S. industry - Dec. 15, 2008
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing against the wisdom of the auto industry bail outs.

I have several clients who are suppliers to the auto industry and I understand that the Auto manufacturers are job providers far beyond just the folks on their payrolls.

This fits perfectly into the paradigm offered by Ronald Reagan:

"If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. If it stops moving, subsidize."
 
Last edited:
katzgar said:
your post is just a desperate attempt to pretend trump is worth a ****...he isnt.

https://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/08/buffett-says-trump-hasnt-had-much-effect-on-the-economy-yet.html
Click to expand...

Have you noticed that I am supporting my impressions with facts and figures and you are supporting your imnprtessions with opinions of those that share your hatred?

Living in an echo chamber is apparently comforting for you.

Which party do you like best: The impotent one or the ineffective one? I'm guessing the impotent one.
 
code1211 said:
Have you noticed that I am supporting my impressions with facts and figures and you are supporting your imnprtessions with opinions of those that share your hatred?

Living in an echo chamber is apparently comforting for you.

Which party do you like best: The impotent one or the ineffective one? I'm guessing the impotent one.
Click to expand...


you are trying to create a pretend world. asserting that buffet is impotent is the height of cluelessness.
 
katzgar said:
you are trying to create a pretend world. asserting that buffet is impotent is the height of cluelessness.
Click to expand...

Did I say Buffet was impotent?

Please try to respond to what I write if you are trying to respond to what I write.

If you are just posting Tourette type thoughts, there is no need to quote me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom