ADVERTISEMENT

orange man = bad economy

How exactly does that pump up production?

that has been all the red hats have been claiming on here talking about Walmart hiring extra people, Harley-Davidson building new plants here and trickle down economics etc
 
that has been all the red hats have been claiming on here talking about Walmart hiring extra people, Harley-Davidson building new plants here and trickle down economics etc
Walmart hiring more people for retail sales has a fractional affect on GDP. HD has a much bigger affect if their production is for foreign sales but still nothing to move the meter. And quite honestly, even if it did, it wouldn't be doing anything other than reversing the trend of the last 20 years.
 
Walmart hiring more people for retail sales has a fractional affect on GDP. HD has a much bigger affect if their production is for foreign sales but still nothing to move the meter. And quite honestly, even if it did, it wouldn't be doing anything other than reversing the trend of the last 20 years.

Those were just two examples given on here of examples of success from the trump tax cuts, so to say they weren't used to prop up GDP is clearly wrong.
 
Those were just two examples given on here of examples of success from the trump tax cuts, so to say they weren't used to prop up GDP is clearly wrong.
There are different forms of success. The Walmart thing helped the job market and hd helped that and the trade deficit. I don't remember anybody conflating those with real gdp but its possible.
 
There are different forms of success. The Walmart thing helped the job market and hd helped that and the trade deficit. I don't remember anybody conflating those with real gdp but its possible.

Dude, those were just some examples of the thousands of claimed direct benefits from the Trump tax cuts that upped the GDP.

So like I said from the very beginning: thanks to trump's wasteful deficit increases he bought some extra GDP.
 
Dude, those were just some examples of the thousands of claimed direct benefits from the Trump tax cuts that upped the GDP.

So like I said from the very beginning: thanks to trump's wasteful deficit increases he bought some extra GDP.

And I'm telling you that deficit or surplus, the effect on GDP is the same. If the government or an individual buys a product, whether the money is borrowed or not, has the same effect.
 
And I'm telling you that deficit or surplus, the effect on GDP is the same. If the government or an individual buys a product, whether the money is borrowed or not, has the same effect.

Jesus Christ how many times am I going to have to explain this.
 
And I'm telling you that deficit or surplus, the effect on GDP is the same. If the government or an individual buys a product, whether the money is borrowed or not, has the same effect.

How is this not understood?
 
Good. Go back and read again where I already did that.
Went back and looked. No you didnt, you just made the claim that deficit spending props up GDP.

Is there any form of domestic spending that doesn't affect GDP? Is there any form of foreign spending that does? Do you understand that production is different than wealth?
 
The economy is fine. It has been for years. My only beef is red hats delusional acting like Trump saved us from the great depression of the Obama years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NinjaKnight
Without the tax cuts, would GDP be higher or lower?
It depends on what individuals and businesses do with the extra cash from the tax cuts. If households buy more goods and businesses increase hiring and capital equipment purchases, the GDP increases, right?
 
It depends on what individuals and businesses do with the extra cash from the tax cuts. If households buy more goods and businesses increase hiring and capital equipment purchases, the GDP increases, right?
Yep. But if the tax cuts go to the richest people they don't automatically buy more goods or services. The government does. Any money that goes into savings or the stock market have a negative impact on GDP. Government spending, whether its liquid or deficit spending has the same effect. If anything, the tax cut should have hurt GDP based on the fact that the people getting those dollars are less likely to spend it in year 1 or 2. Long term it equals out.
 
Yep. But if the tax cuts go to the richest people they don't automatically buy more goods or services. The government does. Any money that goes into savings or the stock market have a negative impact on GDP. Government spending, whether its liquid or deficit spending has the same effect. If anything, the tax cut should have hurt GDP based on the fact that the people getting those dollars are less likely to spend it in year 1 or 2. Long term it equals out.
Page 1 of the GOP book.

Businesses are more efficient in investing funds than the government.

How do you not know your golden rule?
 
Yep. But if the tax cuts go to the richest people they don't automatically buy more goods or services. The government does. Any money that goes into savings or the stock market have a negative impact on GDP.

I could have sworn Trump's MAGA Tax Cut was trumpeted as a mechanism for jump starting our economy. You mean we were all fooled?
 
  • Like
Reactions: NinjaKnight
I could have sworn Trump's MAGA Tax Cut was trumpeted as a mechanism for jump starting our economy. You mean we were all fooled?

Crazy already admitted that both of my examples of supposed benefits of the tax plan increased the gdp
 
I could have sworn Trump's MAGA Tax Cut was trumpeted as a mechanism for jump starting our economy. You mean we were all fooled?

Yes, tax cuts help the economy. If spending decreases then it has a short term negative effect on GDP but a positive effect in the long term. That isnt the point here. You guys are all looking at this politically when its an economics discussion. What we have is a net zero impact on GDP via tax cuts because they are spending the same as they were. It doesn't matter whether you spend 3 trillion by borrowing or spend 3 trillion out of cash flow, the effect on GDP is the same. Eventually, deficit spending will affect GDP because those dollars go to debt service as opposed to purchasing goods and services. Why is this hard to understand?

Now, if the government all of a sudden decides to spend a bunch more money, that is a different scenario because it increases demand.
 
That is bizarre. Explain how GDP increases are inversely related to efficiency.
No I'm not suggesting that. I was making fun of you for saying that giving rich people money was bad for the economy.

But this was weeks ago and I've lost interest in it. This is a weird bump.
 
The longest job creation run is due to the sheer deficit spending. We've printed money and multiplied it in ways we'll never be able to pay back ... unless we have massive inflation.
Its due to money printing, not deficit spending. Deficit spending wouldnt be the end of the world of it was legitimate deficit spending, but they have artificially balanced the balance sheet by using QE. They act as if its a zero sum game in the end but it will eventually wreak havoc on the economy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UCFBS
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/08/nonfarm-payrolls-february-2019.html

  • Job growth screeched to a near halt in February, with nonfarm payrolls up just 20,000 as the unemployment rate fell to 3.8 percent.
  • It was the worst month for job creation since September 2017, offset somewhat by a solid increase in wages.
  • The month fell short of the relatively modest expectations of 180,000 from economists surveyed by Dow Jones

Trillion dollars deficit.

#winning
 
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/08/nonfarm-payrolls-february-2019.html

  • Job growth screeched to a near halt in February, with nonfarm payrolls up just 20,000 as the unemployment rate fell to 3.8 percent.
  • It was the worst month for job creation since September 2017, offset somewhat by a solid increase in wages.
  • The month fell short of the relatively modest expectations of 180,000 from economists surveyed by Dow Jones

Trillion dollars deficit.

#winning
Job growth slows as unemployment declines and wages increase? Big shocker there. Also, the sky is blue and hemmorhoids cause people to scratch their butt. Got any other brainbusters?
 
  • Like
Reactions: UCFWayne
Job growth slows as unemployment declines and wages increase? Big shocker there. Also, the sky is blue and hemmorhoids cause people to scratch their butt. Got any other brainbusters?

I guess you missed the part about missing the expected numbers by 800%? Oh that's right I forgot, you know way more about this stuff than the experts :joy:
 
Job growth slows as unemployment declines and wages increase? Big shocker there. Also, the sky is blue and hemmorhoids cause people to scratch their butt. Got any other brainbusters?

Wage growth is finally growing. Something liberals always claimed to care so much about, up until it started growing faster under Trump. Now it’s irrelevant
 
Wage growth is finally growing. Something liberals always claimed to care so much about, up until it started growing faster under Trump. Now it’s irrelevant

As much as I cant stand the guy, Trumps economic model has actually worked pretty well. I thought for sure that by now inflation would be outpacing growth but somehow they pulled it off. Still not out of the woods and we desperately need to start increasing the size of our manufacturing workforce, but we are in a pretty decent starting place right now. Need to get the budget under control and consumer debt needs to decline but both of those things don't seem impossible anymore.
 
As much as I cant stand the guy, Trumps economic model has actually worked pretty well. I thought for sure that by now inflation would be outpacing growth but somehow they pulled it off. Still not out of the woods and we desperately need to start increasing the size of our manufacturing workforce, but we are in a pretty decent starting place right now. Need to get the budget under control and consumer debt needs to decline but both of those things don't seem impossible anymore.

I also have no problem admitting that we have continued to see the same economic growth that we saw under Obama, even slightly better in some aspects. I am extremely concerned about the massive deficit though, absolutely no reason to be running trillion dollar deficits in this continued economic upturn.
 
I also have no problem admitting that we have continued to see the same economic growth that we saw under Obama, even slightly better in some aspects. I am extremely concerned about the massive deficit though, absolutely no reason to be running trillion dollar deficits in this continued economic upturn.
Pretty much agree, but I do still feel like the growth under Obama was mostly smoke and mirrors. I dont blame him specifically and probably place more blame on the Bush and Clinton administrations, but it still seems like the ""growth" under Obama had more to do with natural recovery and QE than any of his policies. Overall, and the same goes for Trump, I don't see that there were any actual net gains under his watch.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NinjaKnight
Pretty much agree, but I do still feel like the growth under Obama was mostly smoke and mirrors. I dont blame him specifically and probably place more blame on the Bush and Clinton administrations, but it still seems like the ""growth" under Obama had more to do with natural recovery and QE than any of his policies. Overall, and the same goes for Trump, I don't see that there were any actual net gains under his watch.

QE is absolutely to "blame" and I don't agree with it and never did, don't GAF who was POTUS it was straight up inflation.
 
QE is absolutely to "blame" and I don't agree with it and never did, don't GAF who was POTUS it was straight up inflation.
Delayed inflation. Thats kind of the danger of being the worlds reserve currency. Just print as much as you want and let it circulate around the world. As long as it doesnt come back then we came out like bandits, even though our "debt" increased and the balance sheet doesn't look so hot. When it does though, we better have a workforce that is able to provide goods to satisfy that debt. If not, we might have to sell Montana.
 
Last edited:
Most Americans feel like they are living paycheck to paycheck when the economy is doing well. The savings rate is woefully low for this long of a stretch of growth. So when the down cycle happens it's going to get very bad.
 
I never got a reply to this. While not understanding basics of how liquids freeze you also don't understand annual vs quarterly GDP growth.
Again...frumps prints money like it's monopoly money. Anyone can do that and make the corporations and wealthy...more wealthy. Wages have not gone up to where is counts. The 1% and wall street are making making out like bandits. Debt skyrocketing.
 
Again...frumps prints money like it's monopoly money. Anyone can do that and make the corporations and wealthy...more wealthy. Wages have not gone up to where is counts.
And they did under Obama?

I'm as much of a critic of the Republicans-Trump on their faux economy of printing money, but Obama's years of expenditure didn't do jack either.

Minority and other employment is way, way up under Trump.

The 1% and wall street are making making out like bandits. Debt skyrocketing.
The 1% median hasn't rose much at all. They are still only making a median of around $700K/year. The 2% median is still only around $400K/year as well. Even raising the federal income tax bracket for both them to 70% (which means total taxation in excess of 90%) would only net +$250B/year.

I know you Progressives like to ignore the math on that, but you're just inventing things.

And throwing stones from inside your glass house on Obama. Both administrations spent a crapload and didn't get jack out of revenue.

Although it's is looking like the $10K state income tax limit on federal is increasing taxes on the top 3-5% ($150-250K+/year) earners, depending on the income tax rate of the state.

Between than, and the government not over-withholding on 80% of Americans (and grossly on 25-40%) of them, the alleged 'increase in deficit' is actually not happening as the US media predicted.

But in any case ... we're doomed long-term.
 
ADVERTISEMENT