TRUMP'S FIRST 100 DAYS: Here's how they compare with Obama's, Bush's, and Clinton's

[AUFAN78 3,926]

6 minutes ago, GordoAU said:

I like his dealings with China, going in the right direction to defund bad programs such as PP, working with private business for jobs instead of using government, giving access to pipelines, plans for eliminating useless regulations, I could go on. He's not great and has some massive flaws such as the wall, tariffs and not cutting government spending nearly fast enough but his first 100 days have not been bad. 

Thank you! Appreciate your contribution.

[TitanTiger 20,510]

24 minutes ago, GordoAU said:

I like his dealings with China, going in the right direction to defund bad programs such as PP, working with private business for jobs instead of using government, giving access to pipelines, plans for eliminating useless regulations, I could go on. He's not great and has some massive flaws such as the wall, tariffs and not cutting government spending nearly fast enough but his first 100 days have not been bad. 

We've had very few dealings with China so far to have much of an opinion and the budget just agreed upon and that he plans to sign continues funding for PP.

[AU64 10,122]

49 minutes ago, GordoAU said:

More of an Austrian Economist myself, Keynes believed in basically throwing money at problems to stimulate production. That's pretty insane.

 Well he developed his theories during the depression and proposed government spending to rejuvenate the economy. It is not surprising that people in government would latch on to his theories about deficit spending which enables them to reward their friends and supporters. Unfortunately, most folks in government forget the other half of his theory regarding the creation of surpluses when the economy is in normal condition. Worse still is the habit of funding basic government services with debt. Funding infrastructure at least leaves us with tangible benefits.

[au75 75]

"You are so true AU64".  Government forget to pay the debt! 

[homersapien 11,428]

20 hours ago, WDavE said:

Who and what do you blame the crisis on to begin with?

The uncontrolled growth of highly leveraged derivatives was the key factor.  The housing bubble was ancilliary and would never have caused such a crisis on it's own. 

[homersapien 11,428]

15 hours ago, AU64 said:

A good part of that first trillion dollars disappeared into the economy and nobody knows where it went...and as Obama learned (and about everyone else knew) there was not such thing as shovel ready jobs. 

And...as for the debt issue, the biggest joke of the past decade is that some Dems have suddenly found religion on the need for debt control after helping run up 10 trillion in debt with danged little to show for it other than the rich seemed to get richer.   

There was no budget passed this week...just an agreement to supplement the existing budget.....the government is still operating on the Obama budget that was more or less passed last fall but not adequately funded to meet the obligations of the government.   Trump's FY does not start until Sept so guess we will learn more about then.

The modern day run-up in debt started with Reagan.

And it was a Republican who said "the debt doesn't matter".

[homersapien 11,428]

13 hours ago, GordoAU said:

More of an Austrian Economist myself, Keynes believed in basically throwing money at problems to stimulate production. That's pretty insane.

Yeah, Keynes was "insane".    Guess you didn't cover that part, huh?

[homersapien 11,428]

Speaking of deficits:

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/5/4/15536394/american-economists-trump-tax-plan

It’s hard to find an economist who believes Trump’s tax plan pays for itself

[AU64 10,122]

More settled science I guess.....

[TitanTiger 20,510]

12 minutes ago, AU64 said:

More settled science I guess.....

The proper response to that would be to either point out where the economists he mentions are wrong, or to find more economists who can make a credible argument as to how it will pay for itself.  This kind of response doesn't work in this forum.

[AU64 10,122]

14 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

The proper response to that would be to either point out where the economists he mentions are wrong, or to find more economists who can make a credible argument as to how it will pay for itself.  This kind of response doesn't work in this forum.

You must be kidding....that guy offers that response to about any opposing view/post directed to him and failing that, just disparages anyone he disagrees with.  Look about 4 or 5 posts above this and take a look at his cogent arguments..

But to accommodate you  I will toss this in https://fee.org/articles/trump-s-tax-plan-is-brilliant-politics-and-even-better-economics/

and the economists who thought that Bernie's plan was a good one too....http://www.politicususa.com/2016/01/14/170-economists-bernie-sanders-plan-reform-wall-st-rein-greed.html

And how many economists predicted a disaster for England if the "leaves" won the referendum? 

Just saying that these guys have opinions and probably most of those objecting the the Trump plan (which is barely even spelled out) also backed the economic theory that ran up the last 10 Trillion in national debt and has left us with all of the social issues that some folks are railing about 'cause DT hasn't solved them yet.  You believe what a bunch of politically motivated economists say at your peril...JME.

[TitanTiger 20,510]

Just now, AU64 said:

You must be kidding....that guy offers that response to about any opposing view/post directed to him and failing that, just disparages anyone he disagrees with.  Look about 4 or 5 posts above this and take a look at his cogent arguments..

But to accommodate you  I will toss this in https://fee.org/articles/trump-s-tax-plan-is-brilliant-politics-and-even-better-economics/

and the economists who thought that Bernie's plan was a good one too....http://www.politicususa.com/2016/01/14/170-economists-bernie-sanders-plan-reform-wall-st-rein-greed.html

And how many economists predicted a disaster for England if the "leaves" won the referendum? 

Just saying that these guys have opinions and probably most of those objecting the the Trump plan (which is barely even spelled out) also backed the economic theory that ran up the last 10 Trillion in national debt and has left us with all of the social issues that some folks are railing about 'cause DT hasn't solved them yet.  You believe what a bunch of politically motivated economists say at your peril...JME.

I try to keep track, but I thought your non-response was the most egregious.

And if you could so quickly grab some random links, why not just do that in the first place?  All I'm asking for is some actual engagement on the issue.

[AU64 10,122]

12 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

I try to keep track, but I thought your non-response was the most egregious.

And if you could so quickly grab some random links, why not just do that in the first place?  All I'm asking for is some actual engagement on the issue.

There is a tendency for folks on here to make "outrageous statements" politically partisan or whatever...and then demand that you prove them wrong.   They are not dummies and know what the opposing arguments and from what I've observed, only their opinions have merit....like that snarky comment above...."hope you econ degree did not come from Auburn"  which was totally uncalled for.

But I see your point and will try to comply... 

 

 

[TitanTiger 20,510]

1 minute ago, AU64 said:

There is a tendency for folks on here to make "outrageous statements" politically partisan or whatever...and then demand that you prove them wrong.   They are not dummies and know what the opposing arguments and from what I've observed, only their opinions have merit....like that snarky comment above...."hope you econ degree did not come from Auburn"  which was totally uncalled for.

 

And there's also a bigger tendency for people to think that "Pfffft" suffices as a rebuttal.  That might pass in the smack talk forum, but in this one, if you don't want to bother showing where someone's argument is wrong with a reasoned response, simply restrain yourself from responding at all.  homer didn't make an outrageous statement.  He showed an article that the vast majority of economists say that Trump's tax cuts aren't going to pay for themselves.  Either show where they are wrong or move along.

I deleted the snarky comment.  I did miss that one earlier.

[homersapien 11,428]

8 hours ago, AU64 said:

You must be kidding....that guy offers that response to about any opposing view/post directed to him and failing that, just disparages anyone he disagrees with.  Look about 4 or 5 posts above this and take a look at his cogent arguments..

But to accommodate you  I will toss this in https://fee.org/articles/trump-s-tax-plan-is-brilliant-politics-and-even-better-economics/

and the economists who thought that Bernie's plan was a good one too....http://www.politicususa.com/2016/01/14/170-economists-bernie-sanders-plan-reform-wall-st-rein-greed.html

And how many economists predicted a disaster for England if the "leaves" won the referendum? 

Just saying that these guys have opinions and probably most of those objecting the the Trump plan (which is barely even spelled out) also backed the economic theory that ran up the last 10 Trillion in national debt and has left us with all of the social issues that some folks are railing about 'cause DT hasn't solved them yet.  You believe what a bunch of politically motivated economists say at your peril...JME.

I'm confused.  

Who is "that guy"?

I hate to sound arrogant, but are your responses about me or the content I am presenting?