SURVEY: Do you want Trump to finish his first term?

[lannarebirth]

18 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Having nothing to do with Trump or Obama, employment growth always slows as you approach full employment. The pool of available workers has shrunk. As such, an additional 190,000 jobs from a pool of say 5 million unemployed persons is a greater feat than an addition of 250,000 jobs from a pool of 10 million unemployed persons. That said, I don't think Obama or Trump had anything to do with it. This economy is brought to you by The Fed.

 

Also, in the early stages of a recovery, many of the jobs are not "created" but merely people being called back to jobs they had been furloughed from. In the expansion phase of the cycle, which we are in now, there is more actual job creation.

[Andaman Al]

4 minutes ago, riclag said:

 

The news is "The unemployment rate matches its lowest point in half a century"

and its happening under PT watch.

http://money.cnn.com/2018/06/01/news/economy/may-jobs-report/index.html

The news is "Trump is attacking allies who have fought and died alongside US troops in US created conflicts and he is attacking them under the guise of National Security! He is imposing ludicrous tariffs when trade with the US major allies is fair and balanced. He is doing irreparable damage that will in the end lead to the US being isolated and its economy nose diving" and it's happening under PT watch.

[riclag]

8 minutes ago, Andaman Al said:

The news is "Trump is attacking allies who have fought and died alongside US troops in US created conflicts and he is attacking them under the guise of National Security!

So you took my post "The unemployment rate matches its lowest point in half a century" and conflated it to national security.Nice try

[Chomper Higgot]

US unemployment is falling along a trend that was established  in 2010 - Trump is claiming credit for economic improvements established by Obama.

 

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/unemployment-rate

Edited June 3, 2018 by Chomper Higgot

[heybruce]

8 hours ago, riclag said:

I wasn't a B.O. hater, until he went against his campaign promise of not giving in to lobbyist. Even then I didn't hate. It wasn't till his last term.  I've supported all my Presidents.It's the Politician ,the Washington establishment that made me want change. Along with a few more policies of the PT agenda.

Do you think Trump, who has filled his administration with lobbyists, is not giving in to lobbyists?

 

I'd like to see the Washington establishment change, starting with campaign finance reform to keep special interests from owning Congress.  However I haven't seen Trump make any effort in that direction.

Edited June 3, 2018 by heybruce

[watcharacters]

 

 

I don't know if the current POTUS will finish his term or not but I sure wish his press spokeswoman would develop a severe case of laryngitis for the  remainder of his time in office.

 

 

[Andaman Al]

1 hour ago, Alan Whickerbasket said:

Oh cry me a river on this one - look PT has been shrewd enough to realize that the greatest US strength is its consumer market - if China went down tomorrow there would be more than enough countries able to step in and produce, but if America went down there would be absolutely no one to sell it to, in this respect it is the US who hold all the cards and PT is merely saying 'you are going to have to pay to gain access to our consumer market' and fair play to him - finally someone with the balls to do it!!

25 years ago - yes, the US held all the cards, but today it doesn't. The reason the US imports so much is that now, home grown US goods are either too expensive or crap. The reason that Germany is so worried about their Auto industry in this possible trade war is that Americans want their cars because American cars are simply crap. The reason there is such a deficit in trade is because Americans want foreign goods and nobody wants to buy American goods. The food is crap the meat is crap the clothes are crap the medicines are ten times the price they should be. Even the phones, computers and everything else tech are made elsewhere now. If it is defense equipment, Aircraft or guns then buy American, but for the stuff that 99.999% of people need America just can't do it any more. There is NOTHING I buy that is American made. If Trump wants to reduce the trade deficit then the US has to get back to manufacturing things that the rest of the world want.

 

If the US did become totally protectionist and isolated the rest of the world economy would do just fine. There are so many emerging markets to develop that trade opportunities abound. The problem is that most of the developed world got lazy. We forged partnerships with the US and WE stuck by our part of the deal, and didn't do much more as we took the easy option. But Trump has shown us that the USA can no longer be trusted in any deal, treaty or trade agreement, anything the US signs up to is not worth the paper it is written on. So it is time for the rest of the world to stop being lazy and go out and develop all of the other trade opportunities that exist and leave the USA to sink into the inevitable recession that will result from Trumps trade and foreign policy.

 

Even Ministers at the G7 last week said it was like the G6 plus 1. That is how bad things have become. Now if we can just relieve the US of the other thing it hates - the UN and return it to where the first General Assembly met -  in London then the US can get on and build its walls and make itself great again and the rest of the world can progress into the 21 century.

[Jingthing]

Really bad negotiator.

But probably the best con man in the history of the world.

Quote

‘He Pretty Much Gave In to Whatever They Asked For’
...

Why do so many people think Trump is such a skilled negotiator?

Because he says so—over and over and over.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/06/01/donald-trump-deals-negotiation-art-of-deal-218584

[lannarebirth]

6 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

US unemployment is falling along a trend that was established  in 2010 - Trump is claiming credit for economic improvements established by Obama.

 

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/unemployment-rate

 

Neither one of them did anything. I hope you people don't have investments.

[bristolboy]

8 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Neither one of them did anything. I hope you people don't have investments.

Really not so. It's true that in ordinary times, the executive and legislative branch have very little influence on economic growth and employment. But when economic disaster strikes it's a different matter.

 

"The Initiative on Global Markets at the University of Chicago — hardly a hotbed of liberal or Keynesian thought — regularly surveys a number of the leading American economists about a variety of policy issues. The economists surveyed constitute a good sample of the leading economists in the nation, and the panel was chosen to be geographically diverse, to include older and younger economists, and importantly, to include Democrats, Republicans and independents. The most important qualification is that these are top-notch economists: senior faculty at the leading economics departments in the United States who are also vitally interested in public policy."

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/30/upshot/what-debate-economists-agree-the-stimulus-lifted-the-economy.html

 

There were 44 economists who were asked to evaluate the effect of the stimulus. 37 responded. 36 believed that it helped. Only one, Alberto Alesina , didn't. And he's the guy who came up with the notion of that austerity is actually stimulative. Ask the Eurozone how that worked out.

Of all the major industrialized nation, the US came out of the recession first.

[Chomper Higgot]

9 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Neither one of them did anything. I hope you people don't have investments.

Please don’t tell me if the economy had tanked during Obama’s Presidency that you’d not be blaming him.

 

On the basis of the data the best case you could make is Trump hasn’t destroyed the economic legacy he received from Obama - well not yet anyway.

 

Dashing your hopes, yes I do have investments, they did spectacularly well during Obama’s Presidency.

 

 

Edited June 4, 2018 by Chomper Higgot

[bristolboy]

52 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Really not so. It's true that in ordinary times, the executive and legislative branch have very little influence on economic growth and employment. But when economic disaster strikes it's a different matter.

 

"The Initiative on Global Markets at the University of Chicago — hardly a hotbed of liberal or Keynesian thought — regularly surveys a number of the leading American economists about a variety of policy issues. The economists surveyed constitute a good sample of the leading economists in the nation, and the panel was chosen to be geographically diverse, to include older and younger economists, and importantly, to include Democrats, Republicans and independents. The most important qualification is that these are top-notch economists: senior faculty at the leading economics departments in the United States who are also vitally interested in public policy."

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/30/upshot/what-debate-economists-agree-the-stimulus-lifted-the-economy.html

 

There were 44 economists who were asked to evaluate the effect of the stimulus. 37 responded. 36 believed that it helped. Only one, Alberto Alesina , didn't. And he's the guy who came up with the notion of that austerity is actually stimulative. Ask the Eurozone how that worked out.

Of all the major industrialized nation, the US came out of the recession first.

I just remembered what Alesina called his notion: expansionary austerity.

[lannarebirth]

1 hour ago, bristolboy said:

Really not so. It's true that in ordinary times, the executive and legislative branch have very little influence on economic growth and employment. But when economic disaster strikes it's a different matter.

 

"The Initiative on Global Markets at the University of Chicago — hardly a hotbed of liberal or Keynesian thought — regularly surveys a number of the leading American economists about a variety of policy issues. The economists surveyed constitute a good sample of the leading economists in the nation, and the panel was chosen to be geographically diverse, to include older and younger economists, and importantly, to include Democrats, Republicans and independents. The most important qualification is that these are top-notch economists: senior faculty at the leading economics departments in the United States who are also vitally interested in public policy."

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/30/upshot/what-debate-economists-agree-the-stimulus-lifted-the-economy.html

 

There were 44 economists who were asked to evaluate the effect of the stimulus. 37 responded. 36 believed that it helped. Only one, Alberto Alesina , didn't. And he's the guy who came up with the notion of that austerity is actually stimulative. Ask the Eurozone how that worked out.

Of all the major industrialized nation, the US came out of the recession first.

 

I can't access the article I had posted here once before,  but it is by the staff economist of the St. Louis Fed. The paper establishes that any job created by the stimulus came at a cost of $202,000 for one years worth of employment. The paper gave that a GDP multiplier of 0.4%. Even less than killing innocents in foreign lands. The article also established that all funds granted to citys, counties and states are "fungible" and the vast majority of the funds went to normal operating budgets that had experienced a shortfall in local revenues. Not new projects. Just maintaining the office itself.  Anyhow, here's an abstract.:

 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304393213000603?via%3Dihub

 

You can find several articles on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act by the Fed economist William Dupor at the St. Louis Fed's website. He's not a fan.

 

 

Edited June 4, 2018 by lannarebirth

[lannarebirth]

36 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Please don’t tell me if the economy had tanked during Obama’s Presidency that you’d not be blaming him.

 

On the basis of the data the best case you could make is Trump hasn’t destroyed the economic legacy he received from Obama - well not yet anyway.

 

Dashing your hopes, yes I do have investments, they did spectacularly well during Obama’s Presidency.

 

 

 

I would not be blaming him. I am well aware how the business credit cycle functions. I only blame him for the way he chose to spend the stimulus. I think there were more and better ways to have spent it that would have achieved greater return on investment.

[Scott]

Troll posts and reply removed.  

 

 

[bristolboy]

7 hours ago, lannarebirth said:

 

I can't access the article I had posted here once before,  but it is by the staff economist of the St. Louis Fed. The paper establishes that any job created by the stimulus came at a cost of $202,000 for one years worth of employment. The paper gave that a GDP multiplier of 0.4%. Even less than killing innocents in foreign lands. The article also established that all funds granted to citys, counties and states are "fungible" and the vast majority of the funds went to normal operating budgets that had experienced a shortfall in local revenues. Not new projects. Just maintaining the office itself.  Anyhow, here's an abstract.:

 

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304393213000603?via%3Dihub

 

You can find several articles on the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act by the Fed economist William Dupor at the St. Louis Fed's website. He's not a fan.

 

 

One economist you found. Congratulations. On the internet you can find just about any opinion you want to shop for. Overwhelmingly the consensus is against him. And that's among conservative, liberal, and independent economists.

[FritsSikkink]

If you still are taking Trump seriously after seeing the next video there is something wrong with you :

 

 

 

[wolf81]

Many people might laugh at what I will state here, but I will write it down anyways...

 

I believe Trump could stand to become one of the greatest US presidents in the past 30 years or so. I think under Trump it's possible we will see a peach treaty between North- and South-Korea and who knows, perhaps eventually the countries will re-unite. If Trump achieves the peach treaty he will be at least more worthy for a Nobel Peace Price than Obama ever was.

 

I also think he is really a smart business-man, even if he might not give this impression. It's likely he will cause the EU to abandon the nuclear deal. In the end the nuclear deal wasn't about peace anyway, but more about giving European multinationals some new business opportunities. But it seems many of these multinationals are already having second thought now, since they still want to keep access to the US market. I do believe Iran still aims to make a nuclear weapon, so with this in mind, I think Trump makes the right choice.

 

He might also de-escalate the situation in Syria, which is something I doubt would have happened under the warmonger called Hillary Clinton.

 

So far so good. As it stands now, I hope he gets a 2nd term.I think he'll make the world a safer place.

[Jingthing]

Many people might laugh at what I will state here, but I will write it down anyways...
 
I believe Trump could stand to become one of the greatest US presidents in the past 30 years or so. I think under Trump it's possible we will see a peach treaty between North- and South-Korea and who knows, perhaps eventually the countries will re-unite. If Trump achieves the peach treaty he will be at least more worthy for a Nobel Peace Price than Obama ever was.
 
I also think he is really a smart business-man, even if he might not give this impression. It's likely he will cause the EU to abandon the nuclear deal. In the end the nuclear deal wasn't about peace anyway, but more about giving European multinationals some new business opportunities. But it seems many of these multinationals are already having second thought now, since they still want to keep access to the US market. I do believe Iran still aims to make a nuclear weapon, so with this in mind, I think Trump makes the right choice.
 
He might also de-escalate the situation in Syria, which is something I doubt would have happened under the warmonger called Hillary Clinton.
 
So far so good. As it stands now, I hope he gets a 2nd term.I think he'll make the world a safer place.

Not laughing. Groaning. Another mark for the world's greatest and most corrupt con man.

Sent from my Lenovo A7020a48 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

[Opl]

29 minutes ago, wolf81 said:

Many people might laugh at what I will state here, but I will write it down anyways...

 

I believe Trump could stand to become one of the greatest US presidents in the past 30 years or so. I think under Trump it's possible we will see a peach treaty between North- and South-Korea and who knows, perhaps eventually the countries will re-unite. If Trump achieves the peach treaty he will be at least more worthy for a Nobel Peace Price than Obama ever was.

 

I also think he is really a smart business-man, even if he might not give this impression. It's likely he will cause the EU to abandon the nuclear deal. In the end the nuclear deal wasn't about peace anyway, but more about giving European multinationals some new business opportunities. But it seems many of these multinationals are already having second thought now, since they still want to keep access to the US market. I do believe Iran still aims to make a nuclear weapon, so with this in mind, I think Trump makes the right choice.

 

He might also de-escalate the situation in Syria, which is something I doubt would have happened under the warmonger called Hillary Clinton.

 

So far so good. As it stands now, I hope he gets a 2nd term.I think he'll make the world a safer place.

 

So far so good… Don't forget the greatness of Trump ..  " hunters being allowed to resume the practice of using spotlights outside the dens of black bear sows and their cubs to make it easier to kill them"

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-hunting-obama-alaska-bear-baiting-wolves-cubs-ryan-zinke-grizzly-a8364666.html

 

[Slip]

16 minutes ago, Opl said:

 

So far so good… Don't forget the greatness of Trump ..  " hunters being allowed to resume the practice of using spotlights outside the dens of black bear sows and their cubs to make it easier to kill them"

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-hunting-obama-alaska-bear-baiting-wolves-cubs-ryan-zinke-grizzly-a8364666.html

 

Yet another example of how the GOP under the guidance of Trump have no basis on which to manage the US on behalf of its people.  It is wearing to be sickened so on a daily basis.

[lannarebirth]

4 hours ago, bristolboy said:

One economist you found. Congratulations. On the internet you can find just about any opinion you want to shop for. Overwhelmingly the consensus is against him. And that's among conservative, liberal, and independent economists.

 

Well, it is THE one economist whose job it is to study the actual affects of the 2009 stimulus act. He's got a ton of papers about it with real data at the SL FED website.

[bristolboy]

46 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Well, it is THE one economist whose job it is to study the actual affects of the 2009 stimulus act. He's got a ton of papers about it with real data at the SL FED website.

Really? He's the only economist whose job it is? So, no other economists have studied it? Or just that he's the only one getting paid for it? 

There have been plenty of studies of the effect of the stimulus.

Here's a link to a summary of 9 of them.

Dupor comes out looking very bad.

"The biggest problem with the Conley and Dupor study is that their estimates are not statistically significant. Their study indicates that there’s a 90 percent chance that between -35,000 and 920,000 government jobs were created, and between -1.5 million and 2.7 million non-government jobs were lost. Put another way: according to the study, anything between 35,000 governments job being lost and 920,000 being created, and 1.5 million non-government jobs being lost and 1.5 million being created, is consistent with the study."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/did-the-stimulus-work-a-review-of-the-nine-best-studies-on-the-subject/2011/08/16/gIQAThbibJ_blog.html?utm_term=.4a832f173426#conleydupor

 

 

[lannarebirth]

6 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Really? He's the only economist whose job it is? So, no other economists have studied it? Or just that he's the only one getting paid for it? 

There have been plenty of studies of the effect of the stimulus.

Here's a link to a summary of 9 of them.

Dupor comes out looking very bad.

"The biggest problem with the Conley and Dupor study is that their estimates are not statistically significant. Their study indicates that there’s a 90 percent chance that between -35,000 and 920,000 government jobs were created, and between -1.5 million and 2.7 million non-government jobs were lost. Put another way: according to the study, anything between 35,000 governments job being lost and 920,000 being created, and 1.5 million non-government jobs being lost and 1.5 million being created, is consistent with the study."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/did-the-stimulus-work-a-review-of-the-nine-best-studies-on-the-subject/2011/08/16/gIQAThbibJ_blog.html?utm_term=.4a832f173426#conleydupor

 

 

 

Maybe they only read the abstract. Numbers are firmed up in the paper and subsequent papers as more precise data becomes available.. That's what I appreciate. He only cites what he can prove. Very methodical in his approach.

Edited June 4, 2018 by lannarebirth

[bristolboy]

15 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Maybe they only read the abstract. Numbers are firmed up in the paper and subsequent papers as more precise data becomes available.. That's what I appreciate. He only cites what he can prove. Very methodical in his approach.

Yeah, right, they only read the abstract. It's remarkable the reasons people can contrive to preserve their belief. 

"He only cites what he can prove"

Back in the 17th century, Isaac Newton invented calculus. But he wouldn't share it with anybody. 

I guess in Dupor we have another Newton who has devised the secret complete theory of economics that allows him to prove his contention definitively. Maybe some day he will share his calculus with the rest of us.

[lannarebirth]

Just now, bristolboy said:

Yeah, right, they only read the abstract. It's remarkable the reasons people can contrive to preserve their belief. 

"He only cites what he can prove"

Back in the 17th century, Isaac Newton invented calculus. But he wouldn't share it with anybody. 

I guess in Dupor we have another Newton who has devised the secret complete theory of economics that allows him to prove his contention definitively. Maybe some day he will share his calculus with the rest of us.

 

You may take it up with the author if you like.

 

https://billdupor.weebly.com/

[bristolboy]

Just now, lannarebirth said:

 

You may take it up with the author if you like.

 

https://billdupor.weebly.com/

I somehow doubt that Dupor would claim he has "proved" beyond dispute anything. Because what he's doing isn't mathematical proofs. It's economics.

[heybruce]

2 hours ago, wolf81 said:

Many people might laugh at what I will state here, but I will write it down anyways...

 

I believe Trump could stand to become one of the greatest US presidents in the past 30 years or so. I think under Trump it's possible we will see a peach treaty between North- and South-Korea and who knows, perhaps eventually the countries will re-unite. If Trump achieves the peach treaty he will be at least more worthy for a Nobel Peace Price than Obama ever was.

 

I also think he is really a smart business-man, even if he might not give this impression. It's likely he will cause the EU to abandon the nuclear deal. In the end the nuclear deal wasn't about peace anyway, but more about giving European multinationals some new business opportunities. But it seems many of these multinationals are already having second thought now, since they still want to keep access to the US market. I do believe Iran still aims to make a nuclear weapon, so with this in mind, I think Trump makes the right choice.

 

He might also de-escalate the situation in Syria, which is something I doubt would have happened under the warmonger called Hillary Clinton.

 

So far so good. As it stands now, I hope he gets a 2nd term.I think he'll make the world a safer place.

Since your post is so absurd, and you twice refer to a "peach treaty" with North Korea, I'm not sure if this is meant to be taken seriously or as a joke.

[lannarebirth]

21 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

I somehow doubt that Dupor would claim he has "proved" beyond dispute anything. Because what he's doing isn't mathematical proofs. It's economics.

 

Right. But he shows his work. Inputs and outcomes are well documented. He's not paid to have a specific point of view as are economists attached to merchant and investment banks and economists attached to political parties and to a great extent, economists attached to higher educational institutions. If the evidence pointed to different conclusions he'd have presented that just as readily.

[bristolboy]

38 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Right. But he shows his work. Inputs and outcomes are well documented. He's not paid to have a specific point of view as are economists attached to merchant and investment banks and economists attached to political parties and to a great extent, economists attached to higher educational institutions. If the evidence pointed to different conclusions he'd have presented that just as readily.

Really, he comes to the work without any biases at all. Where is your evidence for this? Because he says so? And the economists I previously cited who have widely differing beliefs, mostly agreed that the stimulus did have a positive effect on the recovery. With the exception of that one fellow who history has proven to be absurdly wrong.