Trump / FBI / Russians

"The languid years of 09-14" you mean the years we were coming out of the greatest recession of our lifetime?

You make plenty of fair points, but to act like Trump and Obama inherited the same economy is absurd. Low taxes and regulations is the way to go, especially for small business in the country, but can't act like Trump and Obamas inherited issues are even in the same ballpark.

I am for a good amount of Trump tax and regulatory policies, the issue is the spending. Budgets aren't being cut and bloated military budgets are increasing. We are just shifting the welfare from the poor and unskilled to the military machine. This has been a Republican problem for awhile, Trump seems to be following the same path.

Say he cuts welfare spending 10% then increase the military budget 10%, still not decreasing the deficit. This is exactly what Reagan did, cut taxes, jolted the economy but kept wasting money and left with a deficit 3x what it was when he took office.

Trump needs to cut the budgets, not just taxes and regulations.

 

Politicians of any stripes are averse to serious, impactful cuts to the budget. Because they know that somehow, some way it will cost them votes lol
They may be stoopid but they ain't idiots. All they want for Christmas is re-election & the power & money that go with that. Budget cuts do not get anyone re-elected, just sayin.'

I gave up thinking that any pol would ever do the hard work necessary in the financial aspects 100% on target, simply because it just isn't their money. Unlike in private sector, where your ass is on the line every day, we make decisions with the cards we are dealt & at the end of the day, week, quarter, year, the numbers have to get up & sing 'profits.' That's the real scorecard that the govt never has to work with.

Anyways, the most important thing, imho, is what's called in the stock market 'investor sentiment.' Namely, the perception is often stronger than the reality, and the perception fuels & informs actions. That's why TSLA has such a high valuation from investors, for example. Has never turned a profit, has major deep issues with service of their product in most parts of the USA & would be bankrupt without all of the state & federal tax breaks that Elon finagled. Yet, the product is good & consumers clamor for that product. Perception overrules facts - - for now.

Private sector tends to believe that Trump is great for what businesses are trying to achieve. Big, small, doesn't matter what size biz. Even if small biz didn't get as much benefit from the tax cuts as the corps did, the perception is that we are unimpeded by govt regs & taxes & thus we can invest in our companies. By hiring more people, enacting employee raises & bonuses, spending more on R&D, much more. Knowing, or believing, that the govt won't try to trip us up or block us via higher taxes, regulations, fees & a mentality that business somehow is evil & thus owes the sheeple a lot of everything.

Sorry. Long-winded.

Perception is everything in so many realms. Look at the big bank buildings of the 1930's, lots of those structures still around. Massive columns, grand stairs to enter, amazing lobbies. Why? Because they were trying to convey security, strength, your money is safe with us. Which, it really wasn't (pre-FDIC insurance days); same as pre-Depression days where folks lost their money & there were runs on banks.

Trump backs up perceptions with just enough action items to make a lot of perceptions in biz, real. All the multi-nationals like CRAAPL & MSFT & many others bringing back billions of profits that they had parked overseas. Paying their hit to the IRS, bonusing & reinvesting. All because of Trump's tax cut. Say what you will, but if you can separate policy from the personality of the player, it did happen & will eventually be looked at as brilliant, basic politics that did benefit the economy here in the USA.

The mere mention now of possible trade talks (today's media reports) as an olive branch extended from the USA to China has pumped the market up another 100+ points. Will it happen? When will it happen? Is it merely a pre-election ploy to mollify the critics? Who knows! Perception is moving the market again today.

 

Chavey, ya still awesome, you ain't nvr changed

 

Coming from you, Sir Lancelot, I am humbled

 

You act like tax cuts is some new thing Trump invented.

Are the Reagan or Bushs tax cuts looked at as brilliant? Not really, they both ran up the debt and neither guy was considered an economic genius after their presidency. Trump appears to be doing the same, that is my point. Clinton has gone down as a good economic president, why? Because he left W. with a surplus. No president that leaves the office more debt than he came in with can be considered a great economic president in my eyes. It is easy to pay for everything on credit and pass the buck to the next guy, that was the Obama playbook.

I don't care if budget cuts are popular or not, Trump doesn't care about popularity, right? At least he hasn't shown being shy towards making the unpopular choices. If you want to really drain the swamp, bloated budgets is good place to start.

 

Never said anything of the sort nor acted that way (your first sentence).

I'm clearly referencing the Trump tax cut. I am not comparing Trump's tax cut with other tax cuts. You introduced that view of comparable tax cuts to the convo, fine, but kindly don't attribute words to me that I never typed.

I'm talking about the impact of the tax cuts in both perception from the business community, and reality for corporations, not with genpop popularity. Clearly, Trump's tax cuts are not popular with a segment of the American sheeple.

Just as clearly, Trump's tax cuts directly brought back to the USA billions of dollars from the multi-nationals.

Agreed on how to drain the swamp; balancing the budget would drive the pork back to the farm, so to speak. Unfortunately not happening, as I mentioned, cause no pol is going to perform aggro budget slashing because it equals lost votes in local, state & national elections.

 

Clinton's budget surplus came at the end of second term after congress passed the tax relief package in 1997. As did his best years of GDP growth.

Clinton's economy was only slightly better than Reagan's...again, which culminated towards the end once the 1997 tax package passed. His tax hike's in the early part of his go at it created a less favorable economic environment.

Obama clearly ran the highest budget deficit in history too. GW did a good job at running a deficit. The thing is the budget is controlled (primarily) by Congress. The point is, they can't make the hard decisions like the private sector is required to do...I think this is where we all agree.

 

I think that's a point well taken.

Congresspeople are way too many lawyers, and we all know that lawyers make no money by resolving things. Their success is, sadly, ironically, in protracting the problem, not only for money's sake, but to extend their career & to appear the hero fighting the good fight. Congress, ugh

 

But that is where I had hope for DT, he has seemed to have the power to transcend the bums in Congress and get his shit passed. The debt is my biggest concern, wish it was the same for more republicans.

If Clinton only succeeded after the tax cut of 1997, are you implying only tax cuts create a good economic environment? If so, how would explain Reagan failure to decrease the debt during his presidency?

 

not implying that at all. They are not mutually exclusive. You can have a booming economy and the idiots could still spend us into oblivion

 

Not implying anything. I was clear in what I said, and I have no need to bore anyone by repeating it.

You're flipping to a different set of train tracks, so to speak, and whether I want to discuss it, eh, it's been a long day & so I will just say that everyone's entitled to one's opinion & leave you with that.

 

This is Kyle's modus operandi.

 

Hear ya, it's recognizable; it's just argumentative, nothing ever resolves, near-total waste of time. Repeating ad nauseum is of no interest. Many of the old Fourumme heads did it. Siegfried & a couple others had a real talent for it lol
Thankfully there's the ability to pass or just hit 'ignore.'

 

Kyle is alright he is having some growing pains since he voted for O.

 

I just don't accept everything you guys say on its face. I try to analogize with parts of history. Yank doesn't want to compare the Trump tax cuts to any other in history but this isn't anything new, we have had tax cuts before, that is what I was referencing. If you ignore the mistakes in history, you are only bound to repeat them. My point was and always has been, all these tax cuts don't mean anything without cuts in spending to coincide.

I can't argue that Trumps tax cuts have lead to a booming economy. I will happily concede that. That is why I try to move on to something debatable like how good they will actually be long term if we don't cut spending and I cite tax cuts in the past that haven't turned out as well as the seemed at first. You guys just want all of us to say "hell yeah go Trump" when you post something?

I wasn't even responding to Yankee in that post. I was responding to Jay. Jay wrote that Clintons economy only boomed big after his 97 tax cuts, so I asking why Clinton ended up with a surplus and Reagan didn't. Fair question in my eyes.

 

You never said it but you don't want me to compare it to tax cuts by other administrations so you are acting like it is something new and incomparable, no?

 

You guys act like I just hate Trump when I all I saying is he has the economy by the balls right now so he needs to find a way to cut the budget. If this guy can keep the economy humming and actually cut the debt and not increase it (and maybe STFU on twitter), can you imagine how easy 2020 will be for him?!?!?

I don't like the guy but even I can admit it would be hard for most people to vote against a guy with that on his resume...

 

Maybe one day I will grow up and blindly vote republican