Donald Trump presidency discussion thread V

jooksavage

Igotadose wrote: »

Rats beginning to gnaw on each other in the bucket:

"McConnell: Senate will pass resolution blocking Trump's emergency declaration"

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/432463-mcconnell-senate-will-pass-resolution-blocking-trumps-emergency-declaration

Potentially a rare instance of the GOP standing up to Trumpy. Twitter should be aflame today.

Once Trump vetos it and it goes back to the Senate again I can't see enough Republican's contributing to a veto-proof majority. This will end up in the courts. Still, it's great to see measures like this coming out of the House of Reps. The days of ruling by diktat are over.

everlast75

oscarBravo wrote: »

I just did, and found this Slate article that highlights just how dishonest that "debunking" was.



Which brings me to a question you somehow don't seem to have noticed the previous three times I asked it: are the increases in the national debt and deficit since 2017 good things, or bad?

I wouldn't hold your breath.

I'm still waiting on an answer to my thrice asked question, if he believed Cohen was a credible witness and if so, that all of his testimony was true.

RIGOLO

Brian? wrote: »

Look at the trend line? What trend line?


Your posts are full of ad hominem attacks. You don't believe something because it appeared in paper owned by a know Trump critic. You don't believe someone else because they used to work for Obama.

You aren't actually responding to arguments made with counter arguments. You're quoting other people's opinions. I am not sure why I'm engaging with you anymore.

The Obama economic trend lines , .

these are ALL numbers that economist track .

Small Business optimisim -
Businesses reporting now is a good time to expand -
% expecting higher real sales in the next 6 months -
nonresidential fixed investment , business investment -
Structures Buildings investment -
Equipment -
Durable Goods orders -
Capital Goods orders -
ISM Purchasing managers index -
New Business Aplications EIN applications -
Blue collar workers growth

Thats okay, the anti-Trumpers have your guy Obama and his economic advisers and his economy proposing 2% growth as being the new norm and secular stagnation , thereby excusing their own disatrous MISSES on their economic projections

And the Trump Administration supporters have 3+% GDP growth, we have CEA (Cheif Economic Advisors ) in Kevin Hassett who ACTUALLY deliver the growth they projected, and not missing it liek Obama .
The Trump Administration supporters have

Small Business optimisim -
Businesses reporting now is a good time to expand -
% expecting higher real sales in the next 6 months -
nonresidential fixed investment , business investment -
Structures Buildings investment -
Equipment -
Durable Goods orders -
Capital Goods orders -
ISM Purchasing managers index -
New Business Aplications EIN applications -
Blue collar workers growth

ALL EITHER REVERSING OBAMS DOWNWARD TREND OR ELSE TRENDING UPWARDS BY STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT NUMBERS since the INFLEXION POINT of Trumps election .

ad hominen attacks...how could someone call such a beautiful graph as the non-residential fixed investment growth under Trump an ad-hominen attack.

I guess moving into the real economic realm of statistical econometrics and ergodicity is off putting for some .

mcmoustache

RIGOLO wrote: »

The Obama economic trend lines , .

these are ALL numbers that economist track .

Small Business optimisim -
Businesses reporting now is a good time to expand -
% expecting higher real sales in the next 6 months -
nonresidential fixed investment , business investment -
Structures Buildings investment -
Equipment -
Durable Goods orders -
Capital Goods orders -
ISM Purchasing managers index -
New Business Aplications EIN applications -
Blue collar workers growth

Thats okay, the anti-Trumpers have your guy Obama and his economic advisers and his economy proposing 2% growth as being the new norm and secular stagnation , thereby excusing their own disatrous MISSES on their economic projections

And the Trump Administration supporters have 3+% GDP growth, we have CEA (Cheif Economic Advisors ) in Kevin Hassett who ACTUALLY deliver the growth they projected, and not missing it liek Obama .
The Trump Administration supporters have

Small Business optimisim -
Businesses reporting now is a good time to expand -
% expecting higher real sales in the next 6 months -
nonresidential fixed investment , business investment -
Structures Buildings investment -
Equipment -
Durable Goods orders -
Capital Goods orders -
ISM Purchasing managers index -
New Business Aplications EIN applications -
Blue collar workers growth

ALL EITHER REVERSING OBAMS DOWNWARD TREND OR ELSE TRENDING UPWARDS BY STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT NUMBERS since the INFLEXION POINT of Trumps election .

ad hominen attacks...how could someone call such a beautiful graph as the non-residential fixed investment growth under Trump an ad-hominen attack.

I guess moving into the real economic realm of statistical econometrics and ergodicity is off putting for some .

It's hard to take your newfound expertise in statistical econometrics and ergodicity seriously when you don't address the deficit or even the tariffs that have been costing nearly 3 billion a month.

KyussB

oscarBravo wrote: »

Which brings me to a question you somehow don't seem to have noticed the previous three times I asked it: are the increases in the national debt and deficit since 2017 good things, or bad?

That question has already been answered, though you somehow don't seem to have noticed:

KyussB wrote: »

oscarBravo wrote: »

RIGOLO, you might have missed this question the first two times I asked it:
...

You might have noticed lately that MMT hit mainstream in the US, and has become a lens through which to legitimately view and analyse economic conditions and potential for the country - with mainstream politicians like Sanders and AOC doing precisely this (I'll be very interested to see if people still end up getting targeted for discussion of it...).

When applied as a lens to view the US's deficit and debt levels, it is neutral on them - deficits/debts aren't an explicitly 'good' or 'bad' thing - in fact, if the US economy is below Full Output GDP-wise (which can indirectly be determined as being below Full Employment - which people who promote the Job Guarantee, like Sanders, for near-eliminating unemployment, would class as going at least below 2% unemployment, if not lower), then continuing to expand the deficit/debt until Full Output is reached, is considered a good thing.

At present, the US is below Full Output, and is below the above-described measure of Full Employment - it is also nowhere near a troublesome level of inflation - so (at present...) continuing to expand the deficit seems like a definitely good thing, which would boost the US economy towards Full Output.

KyussB

RIGOLO wrote: »

The Obama economic trend lines , .

these are ALL numbers that economist track .

Small Business optimisim -
Businesses reporting now is a good time to expand -
% expecting higher real sales in the next 6 months -
nonresidential fixed investment , business investment -
Structures Buildings investment -
Equipment -
Durable Goods orders -
Capital Goods orders -
ISM Purchasing managers index -
New Business Aplications EIN applications -
Blue collar workers growth
...

Those are all pretty much secondary/tertiary statistics, when it comes to analysing the performance of the US economy - far from headline stats.

I haven't paid as much attention to the US economy since Trump, due to the signal-to-noise ratio of US politics turning to shit since the runup to his election - but he doesn't seem to be doing worse, neither significantly better, than Obama - the deficit might be providing more sorely-needed stimulus, which is good, but it's still laggard.

I've not had a deep look, but his further stripping of regulations in the banking/financial sector (in addition to the completely inadequate efforts in this area from all presidents before/after the crisis) is going to come home to roost, if a future economic crisis gets amplified by this, before the regulatory damage can be reversed.

Brian?

RIGOLO wrote: »

The Obama economic trend lines , .

All of them? Every trendline?

these are ALL numbers that economist track .

Small Business optimisim -
Businesses reporting now is a good time to expand -
% expecting higher real sales in the next 6 months -
nonresidential fixed investment , business investment -
Structures Buildings investment -
Equipment -
Durable Goods orders -
Capital Goods orders -
ISM Purchasing managers index -
New Business Aplications EIN applications -
Blue collar workers growth

Thats okay, the anti-Trumpers have your guy Obama and his economic advisers and his economy proposing 2% growth as being the new norm and secular stagnation , thereby excusing their own disatrous MISSES on their economic projections

And the Trump Administration supporters have 3+% GDP growth, we have CEA (Cheif Economic Advisors ) in Kevin Hassett who ACTUALLY deliver the growth they projected, and not missing it liek Obama .
The Trump Administration supporters have

Small Business optimisim -
Businesses reporting now is a good time to expand -
% expecting higher real sales in the next 6 months -
nonresidential fixed investment , business investment -
Structures Buildings investment -
Equipment -
Durable Goods orders -
Capital Goods orders -
ISM Purchasing managers index -
New Business Aplications EIN applications -
Blue collar workers growth

ALL EITHER REVERSING OBAMS DOWNWARD TREND OR ELSE TRENDING UPWARDS BY STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT NUMBERS since the INFLEXION POINT of Trumps election .

ad hominen attacks...how could someone call such a beautiful graph as the non-residential fixed investment growth under Trump an ad-hominen attack.

I guess moving into the real economic realm of statistical econometrics and ergodicity is off putting for some .

The real economic realm eh? Let's get real then. Do you remember what happened when a POTUS gutted banking regulations and his successor instituted a massive tax cut purely from deficit spending? I'm sure you can find that trend line.

Trump is doing both. Clinto banking deregulation plus GWB tax cuts. The boom will be big alright. The crash will be even more epic. That's the reality. Obama handed Trump a healthy economy, built on deficit spending. Anyone with any sense would have cut the deficit to prepare for the inevitable downward cycle. What has Trump done to prepare for a crash?

KyussB

The damage caused by Clinton was also running a surplus, instead of a deficit. When the government starves the private sector of money (i.e. runs a surplus, or fails to deficit spend adequately) before Full Output is reached, then if the private sector wants to grow it has to get that money from the 'foreign sector' or from Private Debt.

Clinton contributed to the reliance on Private Debt, with the surplus - amplifying the private debt boom. Public Debt is not actually a significant problem - it is excessively high Private Debt that is the primary threat to an economy.

US Private Debt is still dangerously/teeteringly high. High deficits are still needed to reach Full Output - and then something has to be done to gradually deleverage the private debt levels.

This is all part of the economic worldview Sanders/AOC are pushing mainstream.

Leroy42

But that isn't really what is happening here though, as I understand it. Deficit is reasonsable if being used in the right way. So a deficit spend on education, infrastructure etc can be a positive. But as Ireland found recently, a deficit being increased because of day to day spending is not more reasonable than an individual racking up credit card bills.

So what is Trump investing in by ballooning the deficit (and lets be very clear, this is not a simple increase in the deficit, this is a massive uncontrolled increase)? Spending on the military and reduction in CT seems to be about it. He hasn't done anything of note for education, infrastructure, healthcare or anything.

Now given the circular nature of money any increase in government funds pumped into the economy will have a beneficial effect, the trick is to balance them. But it strikes me that the majority of the deficit is not due to government spending but in the reduction in tax receipts (ie income) and that reduction in tax is not being reflected in an increase in activity such that the government actually ends up better off.

KyussB

Ya Trump's deficit isn't very efficient, targeted government spending would be a hell of a lot better - it's still better than nothing, though.
However, tax cuts are still money in peoples pocket, that otherwise would not be there - i.e. is more money to flow through the economy. Tax cuts are still a legitimate economic stimulus.

Leroy42

Very true, but the massively increasing deficit would surely point to the fact that the tax cuts are not going back into peoples pockets in terms of their ability to increase spending. GDP is rising, but not nearly enough to balance off the fall off in income.

So the US will be faced with a decision. Look for increased income or reduce spending. Either that or the income rises on account of the reduction in taxes, as you outlined, but at present none of the forecasts but the Trump tax sellers are coming to pass.

Now, one can argue that a deficit doesn't matter, it will never be paid back on the US will never be called on it. But one thing that is true is that there are finance costs associated with a deficit, interest, and this takes money directly out of the economy. In addition, owing massive amounts to competing countries such as Chine, gives them increased power in any negotiations.

PVNevin

Asked in a New York radio vox pop, who they would vote for in the election, one woman said choosing between Clinton or Trump was like being asked to choose between having a heart attack or having a stroke.

Obama, off course, instigated the mass upsurge in deportation of immigrants.

Sanders publicly swung in behind Clinton after she was nominated.

Trump, and his gangster methods and Hitler-loving advisers/associates, is not an aberration. He is an expression of the rancid decay of the ruling elite in America. American imperial barbarism around the world has been practised just as much, if not more, by the Democrats as the Republicans.

It was the Obama administration that instigated the dirty-tricks campaign against Julian Assange.

Speaking at a rally on Sunday past in Sydney, Joe Lauria of Consortium News said “Wikileaks has been doing the job the US constitution intended the press to do” (The First Amendment).
Also at the same rally, Emeritus Professor Stuart Rees, from the University of Sydney, said Assange stood in the tradition of Daniel Defoe, Tom Paine and Daniel Ellsberg in exposing the powerful and holding them to account.
The last speaker, John Pilger, said Assange was being tortured by the grim conditions the British government was forcing him to be held under. An illegal detention as found by the UN.

mcmoustache

PVNevin wrote: »

Speaking at a rally on Sunday past in Sydney, Joe Lauria of Consortium News said “Wikileaks has been doing the job the US constitution intended the press to do” (The First Amendment).
Also at the same rally, Emeritus Professor Stuart Rees, from the University of Sydney, said Assange stood in the tradition of Daniel Defoe, Tom Paine and Daniel Ellsberg in exposing the powerful and holding them to account.
The last speaker, John Pilger, said Assange was being tortured by the grim conditions the British government was forcing him to be held under. An illegal detention as found by the UN.

If he was doing that job, he would have released the stuff from the Republicans. He chose not to which shows that he is at best a partisan actor and at worst an agent, coerced or not, for the Russians.

ECO_Mental

PVNevin wrote: »

The last speaker, John Pilger, said Assange was being tortured by the grim conditions the British government was forcing him to be held under. An illegal detention as found by the UN.

Assange is very welcome to come out of that embassy ANYTIME he wants to...he is not chained to any desk in there If he want to come out and he is innocent then let him have his day in court????

aloyisious

RIGOLO wrote: »

I think Kevin Hassett , the Trump Administration has given the best response .

Obama Debunked By Kevin Hassett Chairman CEA For Taking Credit For Trump's Booming Economy
just search on that byline.

Can you provide the debate here with a link to where Obama took credit for Trump's booming economy?

I'm not talking about K Hassett's opinion on the "myth" that Trump is profiting from the work that Obama did to straighten out and strengthen the US economy. I'm asking for the link/proof on which you base your posts that Obama had nothing at all to do with the strength of the economy that he handed over to Trump.

ancapailldorcha

Mod: RIGOLO will be taking a break.

KyussB

Leroy42 wrote: »

Very true, but the massively increasing deficit would surely point to the fact that the tax cuts are not going back into peoples pockets in terms of their ability to increase spending. GDP is rising, but not nearly enough to balance off the fall off in income.

So the US will be faced with a decision. Look for increased income or reduce spending. Either that or the income rises on account of the reduction in taxes, as you outlined, but at present none of the forecasts but the Trump tax sellers are coming to pass.

Now, one can argue that a deficit doesn't matter, it will never be paid back on the US will never be called on it. But one thing that is true is that there are finance costs associated with a deficit, interest, and this takes money directly out of the economy. In addition, owing massive amounts to competing countries such as Chine, gives them increased power in any negotiations.

Well, this is kind of mixing up a hash of a lot of different things. There doesn't seem to be a fall off of income for people?
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA646N

Cutting deficits diverts a huge flow of money away from the private economy. Servicing public debt is actually a flow of money in to the private economy as well (as that's where the payments end up - in some cases indirectly, through the foreign sector). China has no negotiating leverage over the US, from the debt.

Leroy42

KyussB wrote: »

Well, this is kind of mixing up a hash of a lot of different things. There doesn't seem to be a fall off of income for people?
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA646N

Cutting deficits diverts a huge flow of money away from the private economy. Servicing public debt is actually a flow of money in to the private economy as well (as that's where the payments end up - in some cases indirectly, through the foreign sector). China has no negotiating leverage over the US, from the debt.

So you think deficits are fine then, and have no negative consequences?
Cutting deficits CAN divert money away from private economy, but in times are surplus this is a good thing at it can be used to avoid overheating. So its not as simple as you are making out.

If deficits are so non problematic, then why did the GOP spend the whole of Obama time complaining about an increasing deficit? Why would they argue about medicare for all when all it is is bringing money into the private economy?

Simple answer is they don't believe that and they don't agree with massive deficits but they cannot get their tax laws through without it and have decided to look after the top guys at the expense of everyone else.

Even on the higher interest payments, who should pay for that? But even your premise that increasing the deficit leads to higher private spending, it clearly has but not anywhere near enough to balance against the massive tax cuts given to corporations, 15% reduction. Yet in many cases, individuals have seen there tax refunds reduced due to the stopping of offset of state taxes.

And that is the narrative that is always missing from the likes of Rigolo's posts. They go on about job creation (good), GDP (good) but fail to mention the enormous price that is being paid in terms of the rapidly increasing deficit. This will have to be lowered at some point, it cannot simply continue to grow at this rate as the cost of the interest payments would wipe out the governments ability to invest in anything.

Kermit.de.frog

So does "Raisin Kane" actually exist or is that another lie?

My god, if Obama did 1% of this stuff could you IMAGINE how quickly he would have been impeached!

mcmoustache

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

So does "Raisin Kane" actually exist or is that another lie?

My god, if Obama did 1% of this stuff could you IMAGINE how quickly he would have been impeached!

Well he did wear an ugly suit one time and he fist-bumped his wife once in what Fox described as a "terrorist fist jab". And let's not let him off with the dijon mustard incident.

KyussB

Leroy42 wrote: »

So you think deficits are fine then, and have no negative consequences?
Cutting deficits CAN divert money away from private economy, but in times are surplus this is a good thing at it can be used to avoid overheating. So its not as simple as you are making out.

If deficits are so non problematic, then why did the GOP spend the whole of Obama time complaining about an increasing deficit? Why would they argue about medicare for all when all it is is bringing money into the private economy?

Simple answer is they don't believe that and they don't agree with massive deficits but they cannot get their tax laws through without it and have decided to look after the top guys at the expense of everyone else.

Even on the higher interest payments, who should pay for that? But even your premise that increasing the deficit leads to higher private spending, it clearly has but not anywhere near enough to balance against the massive tax cuts given to corporations, 15% reduction. Yet in many cases, individuals have seen there tax refunds reduced due to the stopping of offset of state taxes.

And that is the narrative that is always missing from the likes of Rigolo's posts. They go on about job creation (good), GDP (good) but fail to mention the enormous price that is being paid in terms of the rapidly increasing deficit. This will have to be lowered at some point, it cannot simply continue to grow at this rate as the cost of the interest payments would wipe out the governments ability to invest in anything.

I didn't say that, I said in my first post in the thread that the time to pull back a deficit is when the economy is at Full Output, with Full Employment - not when near that, but when at that point.

Taxes directed at overheating sectors of the economy, is the way to tamp down overheating. That may or may not result in a surplus - and it is neutral on surpluses - they are neither good nor bad, it depends on what levels of government spending is appropriate (independent of any overheating), and what levels of taxation are appropriate (much higher relevance to overheating).

Much of the rest of the post is about rebutting the argument I never made - that deficits are (always and forever) fine.

I never said spending increase would proportionally match tax cuts.

Servicing the debt has pretty much no effect on the US's ability to fund anything. Deficit scaremongering is the main thing which affects the US's ability to fund anything - as it's a very effective political tool for fighting against strong government spending - which will soon become an ineffective narrative (in the US, at least).

oscarBravo

KyussB wrote: »

That question has already been answered, though you somehow don't seem to have noticed:

I noticed; I would have thought it obvious that I wanted RIGOLO to answer it.

eire4

mcmoustache wrote: »

If he was doing that job, he would have released the stuff from the Republicans. He chose not to which shows that he is at best a partisan actor and at worst an agent, coerced or not, for the Russians.

In this case no question he has been partisan as he clearly has a specific beef with the Clinton's but in many other instances prior I would say he has done a great service in exposing corruption.

DrumSteve

eire4 wrote: »

In this case no question he has been partisan as he clearly has a specific beef with the Clinton's but in many other instances prior I would say he has done a great service in exposing corruption.

I always feel like he is exposing others corruption to deflect from the exact same corruption he is engaged in.

PVNevin

What is "the stuff" on the Republicans he has not released?

This is a link to Pilger's speech on Sunday, if you care to have a look at it.

https://youtu.be/Li2gDQxXzYw

Or look up Sydney rally etc; but be smart. Google is supressing left-wing sites in searches.

When questioning the bona fides of those who have attacked Assange, one must place it in the context of the history and current ongoing, increasingly violent actions of the American state.
For me, it is patently clear what the interconnected issues are in the world - the breakdown of democracy under the pressure of the economic crises, and especially the enormous growth in inequality; the unending decline in America's economic and political position, and the consequent eruption of American militarism. Assange, for lifting the lid on the criminal activities of the ruling elite, is being hung out to dry. Or more specifically, he is being tortured.

This notion that there is some important difference between Republican or Democrat is a lie. Just as with Labour/Tory or FF/FG/Lab.
And as important, the world is burdened with phoney-left groups who muddy the water even more.
If you want to know who are the phoneys, then just ask yourself which 'lefts' are not shouting the defence of Assange; not campaigning against the universally rotten trade unions; not fighting to lead a struggle in defence of immigrants? Check those questions and you've got your phoneys.

Gbear

With Trump's 10-year tax returns set to be analysed by the House Judiciary Committee, it has been posited that they will uncover evidence of various financial crimes.

What is somewhat puzzling to me is that if they can draw those conclusions from his tax returns, why can't the IRS?
When there are billionaires for whom there is documented evidence of dodgy links to Russian oligarchs, why aren't they audited and their crimes exposed?

mcmoustache

PVNevin wrote: »

What is "the stuff" on the Republicans he has not released?

From the man himself...

“We do have some information about the Republican campaign,” he said Friday, according to The Washington Post.

“I mean, it’s from a point of view of an investigative journalist organization like WikiLeaks, the problem with the Trump campaign is it’s actually hard for us to publish much more controversial material than what comes out of Donald Trump’s mouth every second day," Assange said.

There's also his preference for Trump which was exposed when wikileaks got wikileaked.

PVNevin wrote: »

Assange, for lifting the lid on the criminal activities of the ruling elite, is being hung out to dry.

Are you sure about that. He wasn't very pleased about the leak of the Panama Papers.

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/717458064324964352

Igotadose

oscarBravo wrote: »

I noticed; I would have thought it obvious that I wanted RIGOLO to answer it.

In other deficit related news, Mnuchin just asked Congress to raise the debt ceiling

https://thehill.com/policy/finance/432657-mnuchin-asks-congress-to-raise-debt-ceiling-as-soon-as-possible

FWIW, this is one of those things that happens - the US runs an enormous deficit. But managing such a deficit is a tricky business. And as the article states, failing to raise it would be a serious crisis, one that I doubt Congress wants, but they may be reluctant to simply roll over on this (as has been the case in the past.)

everlast75

https://twitter.com/tedlieu/status/1102939058966274049?s=19

Kushner in big trouble.

I wonder if he would become a cooperating witness.....

mcmoustache

everlast75 wrote: »

https://twitter.com/tedlieu/status/1102939058966274049?s=19

Kushner in big trouble.

I wonder if he would become a cooperating witness.....

According to Mark S. Zaid (@MarkSZaidEsq), errors and omissions happen a lot but rarely meet the threshold of criminality.

This may be premature from Ted unless he knows something not in the public sphere.

https://twitter.com/MarkSZaidEsq/status/1103003121729589250