Rants, Raves and Opinions AKA "The Octagon"

[DrDave39]

As a free market republican, we have always known that only one number encapsulates what the economy is doing, and that's GDP.

All the other statistical whimsies are nothing more than red herrings.

In high school the course was known as Econ 101.

I would add that you also need to look at purchasing power- If a working person's wages buy less and less of that growing pie, then in the "real world" that's not a "strong" economy. I recall my Econo 101 professor putting it in these terms:

"The only meaningful economic indicator is the number of minutes a journeyman carpenter must work to buy a loaf of bread".

The price of that bread (and cars, and housing, and education, and healthcare) has gone up-a lot. The carpenter's wages haven't.

Tgd.

[DrDave39]

Would you care to share some of your proof? Maybe you should start with lowest unemployment -- no, that's now. Possibly stock market numbers -- no, again this administration has had the highest in history. Now I'm curious as to what you see with conservative policy hurting the economy. And you can leave Regan's numbers out because we did overspend, but that was by design to totally bankrupt the USSR. Ball is in your court for proof.

What's that old joke? "2 out of three Americans can't do basic math. The other half can!

ALL of the indicators you claim support "Trump is better for the economy" are near-perfect linear increases from the 2009 to 2016 trends under Obama- except that Trump dramatically jumped the deficit with his tax cut, and the trade deficit with his tariffs. All the other metrics were exactly where they should have been if the economy had continued the same growth rates (obviously this last month is a statistical outlier and quite fairly is not and shouldn't be counted). Obama inherited a disastrous meltdown and turned it into steady growth. Trimp's number are the same growth continued at the same rate. Maybe pictures will help you get this:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...conomy-charts/

This WaPo column is an opinion piece, but it makes the argument by showing the actual GDP, employment, etc. Data over the time period in question. It shows exactly what I have said- the economy WAS growing when Trump inherited it, and continues to grow steadily, at the same rate. Trump hasn't changed it in any meaningful way.

Since you obviously don't get economics, lets try a sports example- a football team is up by 42-0 at the end of the 3rd quarter (6 touchdowns) , when the head coach dies. The assistant coach takes over and the team scores 2 more touchdowns in the 4th quarter, for a final score of 56-nothing (an all-time scoring record for the team). The new coach proclaims that the greatest scoring day the team has ever recorded is due to HIS brilliant coaching!

In other words, the best you COULD HAVE said for Trump's handling of the economy is that he hasn't managed to fuck up what Obama accomplished. But I have faith in Don, he will manage it somehow!

Since you closed with a sports metaphor, I'll lob one back:

Game, set, and match.

The good dr.

[BarnesMike32]

As a free market republican, we have always known that only one number encapsulates what the economy is doing, and that's GDP.

All the other statistical whimsies are nothing more than red herrings.

In high school the course was known as Econ 101.

Gosh, so why do they bother to keep track of inflation, unemployment, the trade deficit or surplus, etc. ? Can't we just fire most of the economists in the government and hire them back if we need to?

[BengalMan]

As a free market republican, we have always known that only one number encapsulates what the economy is doing, and that's GDP.

All the other statistical whimsies are nothing more than red herrings.

In high school the course was known as Econ 101.

[Twisted69]

Would you care to share some of your proof? Maybe you should start with lowest unemployment -- no, that's now. Possibly stock market numbers -- no, again this administration has had the highest in history. Now I'm curious as to what you see with conservative policy hurting the economy. And you can leave Regan's numbers out because we did overspend, but that was by design to totally bankrupt the USSR. Ball is in your court for proof.

Lets see you stated unemployment numbers. First numbers can be manipulated and have been in history many times by each party then adjusted, which nobody pays attention to. Second, unemployment numbers are not total fact because some workers after searching for a time just drop off reporting, a statistical gray area. Now the stock market is not perfect indicator of the economy by itself because those numbers do not directly correspond with everyday economics (the 99%ers average buying power) anymore and we were headed for a downward adjustment anyway, but now Trump can use this crisis as an excuse it wasn't him. What is little known or talked about are all the executive orders he made shredding all the safety nets that use to be in place for the stock market after the 08 crash, but he removed because his friends could make more money with less restrictive rules, which were there to protect our 401's etc. The tax cuts made the top 1% richer and he gloated at Mar.-a-lago the weekend after telling those there he just made them richer. This new stimulus plan will have mostly the same effect with some buying power given to the everyday workers. The biggest problem coming down the pipeline is somebody is going to have to pay the bills later. At last estimate the deficit was astounding, now add loss of gdp this quarter and the stimulus means our kids or grandkids will be in bondage to some foreign power if we don't quit borrowing to pay for our government spending.

[D Nut]

Would you care to share some of your proof? Maybe you should start with lowest unemployment -- no, that's now. Possibly stock market numbers -- no, again this administration has had the highest in history. Now I'm curious as to what you see with conservative policy hurting the economy. And you can leave Regan's numbers out because we did overspend, but that was by design to totally bankrupt the USSR. Ball is in your court for proof.

Actually, the historic patterns show that President Obama was more successful in helping the economy. These chart shows that starting with March 2019 (2 months after President Obama inherited a global meltdown), the market started climbing, and continued to climb until he help office in Jan. 2017 with the stock market 147% HIGHER than when he started.

Now, comparing apples to apples, with only the first 36 months (up to Jan, 2020, before the COVID-19 crisis), the second chart will show that at the same point in their presidencies, President Obama grew the stock market 57%, while Donald Trump only grew it 47%; a 15% difference. So while it's true that the stock market was on a record high, that upward trajectory started in March, 2009. Also, it's worth pointing out that in 2017, the GOP Congress, Senate, and Donald Trump cut corporate taxes from 35% to 20%, and corporations used the savings for STOCK BUYBACKS, artificially inflating the stock market, without actually expanding business.

I'm sure someone will attempt to bring up the TARP program of 2009, injecting $780 BILLION dollars in corporate and bank relief and that's the same as the tax cuts. The difference is that TARP was 100% paid back. In fact, it made a PROFIT of $40 million dollars after all the loans were repaid and the stocks issued to the government as collateral was sold. So while the 2017 tax cut was just money lost, TARP made a profit for the Federal Govt. And Joe Taxpayer.

Now, if we were to inject real world numbers, we can't ignore that in the last 3 month, all the stock market increase that came about starting in January 2017, has been wiped out. Currently, the stocks are back to about what they were when Donald Trump was sworn into office. I am not saying that Trump created the COVID-19 global pandemic. But you can only use COVID-19 so often as an excuse.

Although this has nothing to do with the stock market, let me point out 2 key differences in the personalities of President Obama and President Trump. The day after President Obama was sworn in, January 21,2009, he was assembled in the White House with the new cabinet, the Fed chairman, and members of the banking industry working to stop the global economic meltdown. It was May, 2009, before he took time off. (his schedule is public record). The day after President Trump was sworn into office, January 21 of 2017, he flew on Air Force One to Florida and golfed that weekend. He took a break from work, before he did one second of work; a trip that cost taxpayers $3 MILLION, some of which was paid to Trump Resorts to house and feed his staff and security detail. Like I said, the Presidential vacation time doesn't have any bearing on the stock market, but it sheds a lot of light on the type of people they were.

[ItsBrypol]

Would you care to share some of your proof? Maybe you should start with lowest unemployment -- no, that's now. Possibly stock market numbers -- no, again this administration has had the highest in history. Now I'm curious as to what you see with conservative policy hurting the economy. And you can leave Regan's numbers out because we did overspend, but that was by design to totally bankrupt the USSR. Ball is in your court for proof.

Come one guys.

Lets be one forever.

Both sides playing dirty politics with Corona. Let the bollot speak and elect ones who worked for us and are capable.

Lets put end and end to "Help the poor trick" and "Look good on TV charade".

[FortunateSon1]

You want to talk about whiny? Again, my point is made by historical numbers. So why don't you go look those up and then you can pull president snowflake's Dick out of your mouth and give me a well reasoned response. Again historically accurate numbers are available and your orange emperor's side they do not favor.

Tickles me how conservatives tout this snowflake thing but can't handle the slightest bit of criticism about it, even when it's easily substantiated with historically accurate information. Guess who's actually the snowflake when you apply critical thinking? I know it's hard for the trumpers to do that, actually apply critical thinking, but I'm sure you were taught it at some point. Wanna go check out how the economy was after every conservative president after 1900? Compare it to the not-so-conservative presidents economic impacts? Its a bad metric all things considered as no individual person or metric can define the health of an economy, but boy does trump and his cult like to think it does so Im reducing the argument to confines you can wrap your head around.

Would you care to share some of your proof? Maybe you should start with lowest unemployment -- no, that's now. Possibly stock market numbers -- no, again this administration has had the highest in history. Now I'm curious as to what you see with conservative policy hurting the economy. And you can leave Regan's numbers out because we did overspend, but that was by design to totally bankrupt the USSR. Ball is in your court for proof.

[UOnlyLiveOnce]

So what has the local hobby scene been like the last couple weeks? Are the providers getting much business? Is our least favorite uncle finally focused on other things for a change?

I'm kind of sidelined, as the wife is home all the time now and it's much harder to get away with extracurricular activities. So I guess I have to live vicariously through you all for the time being.

[BengalMan]

This sounds like the classic Donald Trump "I haven't done anything wrong" line after he says something reprehensible and someone calls him out on it. He is full of noting but hate, don't waste your time even trolling for that man. He wouldn't lift a finger to help anyone else.

It's funny that this conman has ripped off his own employees, his contractors, and his suppliers his entire life in business. Has tried every illegal scam or scheme to fraud the government or customers. Brags about it. And the Average Joe "thinks and believes" that he is going to come through for them. Are there really that many stupid people out there? (Don't answer that!)

[WChris927]

I try to be middle of the road and not let politics drive me crazy or intolerant toward other people. However, whenever the anti-Trump crowd pipes up, all I hear and read is sneering condescension and hate-filled abuse toward their fellow Americans. I will never side with arrogance or hate. For that reason, I find myself growing more sympathetic towards the Trump voters. I know that is not what the anti-Trump people want and they cannot be stupid. Why do they behave that way?

Bam.

This sounds like the classic Donald Trump "I haven't done anything wrong" line after he says something reprehensible and someone calls him out on it. He is full of noting but hate, don't waste your time even trolling for that man. He wouldn't lift a finger to help anyone else.

[BengalMan]

I thought this was a site to share info re professional escorts.

This site is about the economics of pussy. 🤩.

[Jeh123]

NAFTA by design took out the higher priced jobs for the unskilled and uneducated. Big difference.

They sew jeans in Mexico for 2 bucks an hour. A border collie can do this work. No need to pay Americans 20 bucks to do it. The displaced simply needed to get advanced skills or advanced education. The FREE job training programs were there for decades; some were just too lazy to partake.

The facts of NAFTA. They hurt. Sorry.

And all you fellow Republicans, know this, we Republicans voted for it, support it, and love it. It is PURE CAPITALISM. The free market.

I thought this was a site to share info re professional escorts.

[BarnesMike32]

More Trump Derangement Syndrome. No specifics that can be debated, just spewing hate and baseless name-calling. The mindless, bankrupt left on display.

This one sounds like one of those entitled white men, which society has somehow wronged, who is going to vote for Trump if he can't vote for Bernie. Completely irrational.

[BengalMan]

In 1988 the average wage in the US was over $12 an hour. Largest employer in the US was GM (Manufacturing). In 2006, average wage in the US was below $9 an hour. Largest employer in the US, Walmart (retail / service).

NAFTA inadvertently took out the higher priced jobs too.

Mondo.

NAFTA by design took out the higher priced jobs for the unskilled and uneducated. Big difference.

They sew jeans in Mexico for 2 bucks an hour. A border collie can do this work. No need to pay Americans 20 bucks to do it. The displaced simply needed to get advanced skills or advanced education. The FREE job training programs were there for decades; some were just too lazy to partake.

The facts of NAFTA. They hurt. Sorry.

And all you fellow Republicans, know this, we Republicans voted for it, support it, and love it. It is PURE CAPITALISM. The free market.