The Democrat Primary Race Is Filling Up

[printcraft]

Here is GDP over the last umpty ump years. And now we can argue about how Obama drove the economy into the ditch and how Trump jumped in and saved it.

Looks like Trump raised GDP roughly the same amount in 4 years that it took the others to do in 8 years...

 

[oze]

Just an epilogue on the whole wealth inequality discussion:

The last 2 1/2 weeks have erased $7 Trillion in wealth from the stock market... and hence taken a big bite out of wealth inequality in the US... it measurably (by $7 trillion) reduced the wealth difference between the haves and the have-nots in this country.

Yay!

Right?

I would consider myself a have-not, but my IRA portfolio has shed 3% of its value since January 1st, so, no, not yeay.

Sent from my SM-N975U using Tapatalk

 

[Cameramonkey]

After having raised it to where it is? This has nothing to do with virus uncertainty? It's just Trump causing the market to crash?

Here is GDP over the last umpty ump years. And now we can argue about how Obama drove the economy into the ditch and how Trump jumped in and saved it.

And am I the only one that noticed it was solid increases until Obama was elected and then it dipped a bit before taking off again? Nobody else caused it to dip at the beginning of their term. (remember, presidents own the economy, no other excuses now. )

 

[T.Lex]

I think there's a certain amount of talking-around-each-other on the POTUS as economic competitor issue.

It appears to me that the consensus on INGO is that POTUS has limited, if any, direct effect on the economy. There's no INGO consensus on the measure, if any, of that impact. People agree or disagree with different levels of intensity on the trickle down/tax policy/cheerleader aspects of the role.

But, there is also a consensus that sitting POTUSes are generally rewarded or punished by the electorate depending on the economy. If it is doing well, they are more likely to be re-elected. If it is doing poorly (or perceived to be doing poorly), then they are more likely to be un-elected.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

I think there's a certain amount of talking-around-each-other on the POTUS as economic competitor issue.

It appears to me that the consensus on INGO is that POTUS has limited, if any, direct effect on the economy. There's no INGO consensus on the measure, if any, of that impact. People agree or disagree with different levels of intensity on the trickle down/tax policy/cheerleader aspects of the role.

But, there is also a consensus that sitting POTUSes are generally rewarded or punished by the electorate depending on the economy. If it is doing well, they are more likely to be re-elected. If it is doing poorly (or perceived to be doing poorly), then they are more likely to be un-elected.

The Stock Market, however... That is absolutely more immediately impacted by actions. Obviously corrections exist... but wouldn't the booming stock market recently be attributed to policy that Trump had put in place (or removed)? Or even because investors have less to fear with him as President? Sure it may have its own longer-term trend in a certain direction... but things as simple as oil price fights can almost immediately cause it to react.

I guess when we're talking about "economy", which is a pretty big word, there are different aspects of it that we may be focusing on.

 

[T.Lex]

The Stock Market, however... That is absolutely more immediately impacted by actions. Obviously corrections exist... but wouldn't the booming stock market recently be attributed to policy that Trump had put in place (or removed)? Or even because investors have less to fear with him as President? Sure it may have its own longer-term trend in a certain direction... but things as simple as oil price fights can almost immediately cause it to react.

I guess when we're talking about "economy", which is a pretty big word, there are different aspects of it that we may be focusing on.

Ok. Couple things that jump out at me.

First, the stock market is a terrible indicator of the economy. They are kinda related, but not directly.

Second, the stock market hates uncertainty. So, if a POTUS introduces uncertainty, then that creates volatility. The big investors aren't sure where to go, so things get jittery. The best a POTUS can do is to try and limit uncertainty. Which, frankly, is not humanly possible.

Third, other than fear of uncertainty, generalized "fear" isn't a big deal. Afraid car sales are going to decrease because POTUS candidate runs on a platform of alternative fuels? Ok, price that into the market value of auto manufacturers.

Of course, I'm simplifying things. But, that's just to say that for election purposes, it doesn't matter. The electorate, by and large, only cares about their individual financial well being at the time of the vote. If they feel good, they're more likely to stay with the current guy. If they don't, then they don't.

 

[Brad69]

If Biden/Abrams get elected the economy will tank!

No chart needed rejoining the “Paris” deal alone will hobble the country not to mention the corporate tax increase.

 

[spencer rifle]

Second, the stock market hates uncertainty. So, if a POTUS introduces uncertainty, then that creates volatility. The big investors aren't sure where to go, so things get jittery. The best a POTUS can do is to try and limit uncertainty. Which, frankly, is not humanly possible.

Not completely possible, but partially. Assuring business interests that the tax structure will remain stable (not even go down necessarily, but not change much) and the regulatory scheme will not increase (reducing would be better) goes a long way toward decreasing uncertainty. Trump seem to have accomplished this at least in the business sector's view, and they did what they do in periods of relative stability - invest, expand, hire.

 

[BugI02]

Bahahha.... Bernie can't win, but he's staying in just to **** with the DNC

Bernie Sanders is staying in the race and planning to debate Joe Biden on Sunday despite a string of recent primary losses

Wha-a-a-at? As of this morning, there are still 2300 delegates up for grabs with only 1991 needed for a first round win (barring faithless delegates)

Biden is at 860, Bernie at 710. Bernie only needs to take 51.3% of the remaining delegates to keep O'Biden from a first round win (and arrive virtually tied for delegates) and only needs 55.7% to win outright

The contest is far from over, despite the same people who lie to you in the polls claiming otherwise

 

[BugI02]

Maybe this is a buyout negotiation ploy. Another [STRIKE]vacation home[/STRIKE] [dacha] in a more expensive market maybe.

Fixy

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Fixy

???

 

[BugI02]

After having raised it to where it is? This has nothing to do with virus uncertainty? It's just Trump causing the market to crash?

Nope, it's schadenfreude - your loved ones and 401k are just collateral damage from the frantic need to get Trump. Notice how no one says what they would do different, only formless bull**** about how he isn't doing enough (after they fought precautions he wanted to take tooth and nail).

Alpo refusing to give Trump any credit for a rising economy but slavering to place all the blame on him for a downturn. TDS is more contagious than CoVid19

Hopefully folks on the fence will remember this November 3rd

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Nope, it's schadenfreude - your loved ones and 401k are just collateral damage from the frantic need to get Trump. Notice how no one says what they would do different, only formless bull**** about how he isn't doing enough (after they fought precautions he wanted to take tooth and nail).

Alpo refusing to give Trump any credit for a rising economy but slavering to place all the blame on him for a downturn. TDS is more contagious than CoVid19

Hopefully folks on the fence will remember this November 3rd

Didn't they accuse him of being racist when he suggested banning flights to and from certain countries? But now, "he should have done more sooner!"

 

[BugI02]

Oh puhleeze. I've put up charts time after time. You are one of the most internet savvy people we have. You KNOW where the charts are. And you've obviously looked at them.

Which one do you want? GDP history? Unemployment? Tell me. I'll be glad to bring it here.

Just stop with the cognitive dissonance.

So GP had to go look at the charts? Januspo keeps telling me in other situations that it is too much of a bother

 

[BugI02]

???

Dacha is a Russian vacation/second home (or did you not see the change in the quoted body of that post?)

 

[Alpo]

And am I the only one that noticed it was solid increases until Obama was elected and then it dipped a bit before taking off again? Nobody else caused it to dip at the beginning of their term. (remember, presidents own the economy, no other excuses now. )

You weren't around in 2008, I see. Well, have dad mansplain the Bush crisis to ya.

 

[BugI02]

Didn't they accuse him of being racist when he suggested banning flights to and from certain countries? But now, "he should have done more sooner!"

Yep. Hong Kong and Taiwan did so at the time Trump wanted to, and it seems to have been an effective measure

 

[Tombs]

You guys have spent all day with your pearls clutched. While your president drives the economy into the ground as he tells you he's smarter than every epidemiologist ever born.

Go ahead. Keep me from laughing at your absurdity.

It went into the ground before the first cases were even confirmed in the US.

When the supply chains for most of these American mega corps are in question, the economy starts falling. And you legitimately think this has anything to do with Trump, much less anything in the US at all?

If you want to see a crash that'll make the 2008 GFC look like a gold rush, just wait until a nearly dead senile old man is elected.

 

[BugI02]

You weren't around in 2008, I see. Well, have dad mansplain the Bush crisis to ya.

Bull****. Clinton handed Bush a **** sandwich of an economy, and Carter did the same for Reagan yet they both presided over increasing GDP year over year

Yer not forgetting double digit interest rates (Carter) or the dot com crash (Clinton) are you? I know you're old enough to remember them

 

[Alpo]

So GP had to go look at the charts? Januspo keeps telling me in other situations that it is too much of a bother

Yeah. He had to. Because he forgot what I already posted.\\

You still haven't proved your own charts. You haven't defined the Y axis on the semi-log chart you posted.

But, we know that you are better at criticism than actually proving anything.