Jump to content
JustBecause

The Trump Economy: 3.2% GDP 1st Qtr 2019

Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Not an apples to apples comparison. Could you tell me what the interest rate policy was during Obama’s presidency?

That's convenient.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not an apples to apples comparison. Could you tell me what the interest rate policy was during Obama’s presidency?


You are a fucking idiot

Interest rates are still at historical lows. The Fed has been overly accommodating which may lead to the next crisis as markets create a bubble.

Economy probably would be doing better if Trump wasn’t president given the instability he has inserted into the economy (eg trade war)

Normally presidents shouldn’t be credited with the economic performance but trump has been such a destabilizing force that he is a drag on the economy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

That's convenient.

No it’s not. It’s reality. 

The fact is, Obama is the only President to have the luxury of a zero interest rate environment as a tailwind to the economy during his term.  And, he had it essentially his entire two terms. 

31 minutes ago, happyfunball said:

You are a fucking idiot

Interest rates are still at historical lows. The Fed has been overly accommodating which may lead to the next crisis as markets create a bubble.

 

The fact is we have had solid growth during the first interest rate hiking cycle in about a decade. Yes they are still low historically speaking, but they’re are higher than under Obama. If you don’t see that as an important point, then maybe you are the fucking idiot?

35 minutes ago, happyfunball said:

Economy probably would be doing better if Trump wasn’t president given the instability he has inserted into the economy (eg trade war)

Normally presidents shouldn’t be credited with the economic performance but trump has been such a destabilizing force that he is a drag on the economy.

 

This part all just speculation and nonsense.

Trade war is probably a drag on the economy.

Deregulation is a boost.

Being seen as business friendly is also a positive as people’s and business expectations actually influence the amount of investment, and thus economic activity. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

No it’s not. It’s reality. 

The fact is, Obama is the only President to have the luxury of a zero interest rate environment as a tailwind to the economy during his term.  And, he had it essentially his entire two terms. 

The fact is we have had solid growth during the first interest rate hiking cycle in about a decade. Yes they are still low historically speaking, but they’re are higher than under Obama. If you don’t see that as an important point, then maybe you are the fucking idiot?

This part all just speculation and nonsense.

Trade war is probably a drag on the economy.

Deregulation is a boost.

Being seen as business friendly is also a positive as people’s and business expectations actually influence the amount of investment, and thus economic activity. 

Just curious. When the next recession hits who, besides trump of course, are you going to blame? Obama? Hillary? Mueller? The fed? The dems? Santa Claus?

So many choices you will have. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This part all just speculation and nonsense.
Trade war is probably a drag on the economy.
Deregulation is a boost.
Being seen as business friendly is also a positive as people’s and business expectations actually influence the amount of investment, and thus economic activity. 


I love the deregulation troupe. I have never seen a company not invest because of regulation. Regulation only impacts speed of investment in my experience. It is next impossible to prove that deregulation is increasing company investment. And of course all execs will cite it as a driver as their incentive is to sell that lie.

Regarding tax cuts, it has only stimulating share buy backs and M&A. Even Blackrock despite their spin shows that capex hasn’t really up-ticked on a % basis. See link.

https://www.blackrock.com/corporate/literature/whitepaper/bii-global-equity-outlook-june-2018.pdf

If I get bored, Bloomberg did analysis on what companies did with the extra cash from tax savings. It was close to 70% - 80% was used for share buybacks, dividends, and M&A. It overwhelming showed that the tax savings effectively had no impact to reinvestment in the company

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, happyfunball said:

 


I love the deregulation troupe. I have never seen a company not invest because of regulation. Regulation only impacts speed of investment in my experience. It is next impossible to prove that deregulation is increasing company investment. And of course all execs will cite it as a driver as their incentive is to sell that lie.

Regarding tax cuts, it has only stimulating share buy backs and M&A. Even Blackrock despite their spin shows that capex hasn’t really up-ticked on a % basis. See link.

https://www.blackrock.com/corporate/literature/whitepaper/bii-global-equity-outlook-june-2018.pdf

If I get bored, Bloomberg did analysis on what companies did with the extra cash from tax savings. It was close to 70% - 80% was used for share buybacks, dividends, and M&A. It overwhelming showed that the tax savings effectively had no impact to reinvestment in the company

 

You, sir, are interrupting Fairy Tale Time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, happyfunball said:

I love the deregulation troupe. I have never seen a company not invest because of regulation. Regulation only impacts speed of investment in my experience. It is next impossible to prove that deregulation is increasing company investment. And of course all execs will cite it as a driver as their incentive is to sell that lie.
 

 

What an interesting paragraph. 

Anecdotally, you have never seen a company hold back on investment because of regulations, just the speed was impacted. Ok. 

It is next to impossible to prove that deregulation is increasing company investment. Perhaps so, but is it hard to see why if you remove some of the barriers and costs to doing business that it would be easier to do business? Maybe more so for smaller businesses that have trouble absorbing the costs that large companies can?

All execs will cite it as a driver, but they’re lying because they’re incentivized to do so? Why is it beneficial for them to lie about it? Everybody else is lying, but you’re the whistleblower out here fighting the good fight?

As far as your mention of the tax cuts...

D3056775-FF10-4-FE5-B1-F6-4-F0-E2-E6759-

 

3 hours ago, hpslugga said:

You, sir, are interrupting Fairy Tale Time

Are you still living the Fairy Tale that you’re some kind of football guru?  That was you all those years ago, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait- did GRHorn just frame +/- 6 years of global deflationary pressure starting with a narrowly avoided catastrophe as a “tailwind”?

 

 

Jesus.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Are you still living the Fairy Tale that you’re some kind of football guru?  That was you all those years ago, right?



*punches self in the dick* and continues to debate with right wing troll.

The thread is about trump’s economy and tax cuts are a signature achievement.

Re: deregulation is always trotted out when there is no empirical evidence. Best way would be to look into industries that have seen deregulation and see if there is a significant uptick but there are so many other factors that would be hard to say deregulation caused the uptick.

If you read the blackrock link, the majority of capex spend is from the IT / tech sector which hasn’t been impacted by deregulation.

Coal has been part of the deregulation push but continues to shrink because the industry isn’t economical so deregulation has only increased profits not growth or investment in this example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, GRHorn said:

The fact is, Obama is the only President to have the luxury of a zero interest rate environment as a tailwind to the economy during his term.  And, he had it essentially his entire two terms. 

There's a couple of things you need to be aware of, Mr. Amateur Economist.

The first is that the economy was teetering on a severe depression (with a "d") when Obama was elected.  That's not where intelligent central bankers advocate higher interest rates.  

The second is that a zero interest rate environment is no picnic.  Runaway inflation is bad, but deflation is worse.  Much worse.

The fact that Obama and Bernanke were able to navigate those times and bring back an economy that even Trump can't fuck up is nothing short of remarkable.  

Edited by Bullneck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, JimmyJames said:

Just curious. When the next recession hits who, besides trump of course, are you going to blame? Obama? Hillary? Mueller? The fed? The dems? Santa Claus?

So many choices you will have. 

Hillary's emails to Mr. Bengazi, of course.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bozo_Casanova said:

Wait- did GRHorn just frame +/- 6 years of global deflationary pressure starting with a narrowly avoided catastrophe as a “tailwind”?

 

 

Jesus.

 

I believe he did, yes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, GRHorn said:

Are you still living the Fairy Tale that you’re some kind of football guru?  That was you all those years ago, right?

Y’all never disappoint

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

the 2008/2009 collapse of the financial sector as a "tailwind."

lulz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



*punches self in the dick* and continues to debate with right wing troll.

The thread is about trump’s economy and tax cuts are a signature achievement.

Re: deregulation is always trotted out when there is no empirical evidence. Best way would be to look into industries that have seen deregulation and see if there is a significant uptick but there are so many other factors that would be hard to say deregulation caused the uptick.

If you read the blackrock link, the majority of capex spend is from the IT / tech sector which hasn’t been impacted by deregulation.

Coal has been part of the deregulation push but continues to shrink because the industry isn’t economical so deregulation has only increased profits not growth or investment in this example.



More data to support my point above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/28/2019 at 7:46 PM, Bozo_Casanova said:

Wait- did GRHorn just frame +/- 6 years of global deflationary pressure starting with a narrowly avoided catastrophe as a “tailwind”?

 

 

Jesus.

 

Obama took over at the absolute nadir of the Great Recession.  The worst was behind us. Tarp and QE1 had already been initiated. Zirp and QE going well into his second term were tailwinds as far as helping economic performance during that time. They were necessary at first, but there was plenty of debate over when to phase those programs out and plenty of people who felt they went longer than needed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, GRHorn said:

Obama took over at the absolute nadir of the Great Recession.  The worst was behind us. Tarp and QE1 had already been initiated. Zirp and QE going well into his second term were tailwinds as far as helping economic performance during that time. They were necessary at first, but there was plenty of debate over when to phase those programs out and plenty of people who felt they went longer than needed. 

The economic trends following the Great Recession, including those going on now, will be credited by historians to Barack Obama. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

The economic trends following the Great Recession, including those going on now, will be credited by historians to Barack Obama. 

Ah, so the greatest wealth disparity and income inequality will be credited to Obama?  

Regardless, Presidents should not get credit nor blame regarding the economy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, babysdaddy said:

Ah, so the greatest wealth disparity and income inequality will be credited to Obama?  

Regardless, Presidents should not get credit nor blame regarding the economy. 

You're right, but for better or worse this is the Obama Economy. He will go down as one of the better presidents we've ever had.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/28/2019 at 7:46 PM, Bozo_Casanova said:

Wait- did GRHorn just frame +/- 6 years of global deflationary pressure starting with a narrowly avoided catastrophe as a “tailwind”?

 

 

Jesus.

 

I laughed.  Was wondering who else caught that.  It was a wall of bullshit with about 5% truth mixed in.  That wasn’t part of the 5%.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, babysdaddy said:

Regardless, Presidents should not get credit nor blame regarding the economy. 

That’s usually true.  But when some dumbass know it all decides to start a trade war because they’re so easy to win, he should catch a metric shit ton of blame.  That’s a fact.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, David Dennison said:

You're right, but for better or worse this is the Obama Economy. He will go down as one of the better presidents we've ever had.

You know how when people give toasts at weddings, going before or after someone who is a total jackoff automatically gets that toaster to be artificially elevated in the eyes of the listener?  Obama got it on both sides of his Presidency.  He really wasn't that great, but you know that.  He's the tallest midget in the room.

 

Just now, ChiTownDoc said:

That’s usually true.  But when some dumbass know it all decides to start a trade war because they’re so easy to win, he should catch a metric shit ton of blame.  That’s a fact.  

Eh, I disagree with the style but not the substance.  This resetting of the interplay between the Chinese and the rest of the world was pretty critical, if it gets done.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

You're right, but for better or worse this is the Obama Economy. He will go down as one of the better presidents we've ever had.

So Bush should get credit for the first two years of Obama's term and Bush gets credit for pulling us out of the recession?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, babysdaddy said:

You know how when people give toasts at weddings, going before or after someone who is a total jackoff automatically gets that toaster to be artificially elevated in the eyes of the listener?  Obama got it on both sides of his Presidency.  He really wasn't that great, but you know that.  He's the tallest midget in the room.

 

Eh, I disagree with the style but not the substance.  This resetting of the interplay between the Chinese and the rest of the world was pretty critical, if it gets done.  

Come on you know the markets... and optics between countries is very important.  There’s a reason it’s called diplomacy.  Trump was a buffoon and it cost his most loyal followers in IA/WI.  Of course we all subsidized the hit they took.  Fucking Trump...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, NotActuallyALonghorn said:

So Bush should get credit for the first two years of Obama's term and Bush gets credit for pulling us out of the recession?

Barack Obama will get credit for what started in March of 2009. When the trendlines that began then start going down, the Obama economy will be over and the president in office at that time will be saddled with the blame, rightly or wrongly. That's how it will go down in history. You can believe whatever you want.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

April jobs report numbers from NYT.

U.S. Added 263,000 Jobs in April; Unemployment Rate at 3.6%

The economy produced another strong month of growth, and the jobless rate fell to the lowest level of the recovery.

The Labor Department released the April data on hiring and unemployment on Friday morning, providing an up-to-the-minute snapshot of the economy.

The Numbers

  • 263,000 jobs were created last month. Analysts had expected a gain of 190,000 jobs, according to Bloomberg.

  • The unemployment rate was 3.6 percent, the lowest in half a century. The rate was 3.8 percent in March.

  • Average hourly earnings rose by 0.2 percent, which follows an increase of 0.1 percent in March. Over the last 12 months, earnings have risen by a healthy 3.2 percent, a hair’s breadth from the best level of the recovery.

The Takeaway

Employers added 263,000 jobs last month, underscoring the economy’s resilience after some analysts had feared earlier in the year that a slowdown was coming.

The latest data suggest that the economy is showing robust growth, and provides a talking point for Republicans and President Trump as the 2020 presidential campaign nears. Job creation data for March was revised down slightly, while February’s weak 33,000 reading was revised up to 56,000.

Payrolls have now risen for 104 quarters in a row, and the economy has created more than 20 million jobs since the Great Recession ended in 2009.

“Growth will slow but there’s very little in the data flow to suggest a recession is around the corner,” said Michael Gapen, chief United States economist at Barclays. “Employment growth is solid.”

“Some people are tempted to say slow growth is fragile,” Mr. Gapen said. “We’ve been on the other side, saying that slow growth is durable.”

 

Sunnier Skies?

After a round of jitters in late 2018 and early this year, investors and consumers have been feeling more confident about the economy’s trajectory.

Last week, the Commerce Department reported that the economy expanded at a 3.2 percent annual rate in the first quarter, well above forecasts. And on Thursday, the government said factory orders jumped 1.9 percent in March, the best monthly showing since August 2018.

Stocks have rallied sharply this year as recession fears have dimmed, with the seeming return of the not-too-hot, not-too-cold scenario favored by traders. On Wednesday, the Federal Reserve essentially endorsed that view by leaving interest rates unchanged and reiterating that it was comfortable with where rates stood.

 

A Tight Labor Market

Not long ago, economists were worried that the recovery was producing few high-paying positions even as payrolls expanded. Those concerns have grown more distant as average hourly earnings have climbed at a faster pace in recent months.

Businesses are wrestling with what has become a job-seeker’s market, according to Amy Glaser, a senior vice president at staffing company Adecco.

“The candidates are 100 percent in the driver’s seat,” she said. “If employers don’t respond to job applicants in 48 hours, they’re gone. Somebody else has called with a better offer. Or if you schedule an interview too far out, they ghost you.”

As a result, employers have been dangling some notable perks, she added. Among them are upgraded cafeterias, day care, and subsidies for essentials like gas and parking. Call-center managers are letting more employees work from home.

Candidates who might have otherwise been stuck on the sidelines for lack of experience are getting a second look, said Martha Gimbel, research director at Indeed, the job-search site. Fast-growing search terms include “anything full time,” “office jobs no experience” and “hiring immediately no experience.”

The labor-force participation rate, which measures the proportion of people 16 and older is employed or looking for a job, bottomed out at 62.4 percent in September 2015 and now stands at 62.8 percent.

Edited by LonghornJudas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How many bailouts did Trump give to the banks and big companies so far?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/28/2019 at 8:50 PM, happyfunball said:

the majority of capex spend is from the IT / tech sector which hasn’t been impacted by deregulation.

 

 

IT/tech is interesting because they're rushing to grow faster than regulation can keep up.  

 

there's not been another administration which has affected the markets on a daily basis as much as this one.  the world financial markets are dangling on strings of 280 character tweets. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Zavala said:

How many bailouts did Trump give to the banks and big companies so far?

a whooooooole bunch of them.

see "tax cuts and job act of 2017."

not to mention the direct subsidies/bailout payments to agriculture for losses in chinese trade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EuroHorn said:

trump-train-flag-its-magic-wand-obama-co

lowest common denominator.

i truly am amused by the "conservatives" peacocking around about the surge from pouring gasoline (in the form of stimulus we are going to need in the near future) on an economy with overheated short run aggregate demand via the greatest deficit spending figures that have ever been seen in the history of the united states.

kind of mind-blowing.  but predictable i suppose.

Edited by sidis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, sidis said:

lowest common denominator.

i truly am amused by the "conservatives" peacocking around about the surge from pouring gasoline (in the form of stimulus we are going to need in the near future) on an economy with overheated short run aggregate demand via the greatest deficit spending figures that have ever been seen in the history of the united states.

kind of mind-blowing.  but predictable i suppose.

This. Obama stimulus on a cratering economy was the greatest evil ever.  Trump stimulus onto an already strong economy, 1) just so he can brag about a pointless number, and 2) leaving nothing in the tank for when we'll need it later....it's the greatest policy move in American history.

It really is mind-blowing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

This. Obama stimulus on a cratering economy was the greatest evil ever.  Trump stimulus onto an already strong economy, 1) just so he can brag about a pointless number, and 2) leaving nothing in the tank for when we'll need it later....it's the greatest policy move in American history.

It really is mind-blowing.

It makes it all but certain that a Democrat will have to come in and clean up the eventual mess. Again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EuroHorn said:

trump-train-flag-its-magic-wand-obama-co

That's gonna kill on facebook and email forwards. Early congrats on all of the likes and shares you are about to get from your those random people you kinda knew in high school. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/26/2019 at 2:22 PM, sidis said:

highly similar domestic and economic policy directions...similar levels of embracing deficit spending...

annual gdp growth rates:

2004 - 3.8%

2005 - 3.5%

2006 - 2.9%

hmm.

Question for you, amico:  

There are numerous quantifiable economic indicators that get used in isolation to highlight some point, typically how well or poorly some politician or political policy is doing. The relevance of that indicator will then be challenged by the opposition and they will bring up some other isolated indicator.  What would have some use for these comparative purposes is an indicator that is a calculation from the top 15 or so generally agreed upon meaningful indicators.  Basically, a “QB rating” for the economy.  That way, if one were to spend massively and skyrocket the debt, this would negatively impact this overall indicator and so if one were to point to an increase in GDP in isolation, one could reply with this overall indicator that takes these things into consideration. 

Does such an economic indicator exist?  If so, what are they?  If none come to mind, any chance you could make one?

Edited by Axiom of Choice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

It makes it all but certain that a Democrat will have to come in and clean up the eventual mess. Again.

Well, aat least in that scenario Trump is gone

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

This. Obama stimulus on a cratering economy was the greatest evil ever.  Trump stimulus onto an already strong economy, 1) just so he can brag about a pointless number, and 2) leaving nothing in the tank for when we'll need it later....it's the greatest policy move in American history.

It really is mind-blowing.

obama got off to a controversial start with bailing out detroit right after enacting a huge stimulus.  the bailout i completely disagreed with.  i also disagreed with TARP when W did it.  they should've let the pieces fall.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, sidis said:

a whooooooole bunch of them.

see "tax cuts and job act of 2017."

not to mention the direct subsidies/bailout payments to agriculture for losses in chinese trade.

Maybe I'm missing something here, but I'm not picking up what your putting down.

Quote

Corporate tax[edit]

The corporate tax rate was lowered from 35% to 21%, while some related business deductions and credits were reduced or eliminated. The Act also changed the U.S. from a global to a territorial tax system with respect to corporate income tax. Instead of a corporation paying the U.S. tax rate (35%) for income earned in any country (less a credit for taxes paid to that country), each subsidiary pays the tax rate of the country in which it is legally established. In other words, under a territorial tax system, the corporation saves the difference between the generally higher U.S. tax rate and the lower rate of the country in which the subsidiary is legally established. Bloomberg journalist Matt Levine explained the concept, "If we're incorporated in the U.S. [under the old global tax regime], we'll pay 35 percent taxes on our income in the U.S. and Canada and Mexico and Ireland and Bermuda and the Cayman Islands, but if we're incorporated in Canada [under a territorial tax regime, proposed by the Act], we'll pay 35 percent on our income in the U.S. but 15 percent in Canada and 30 percent in Mexico and 12.5 percent in Ireland and zero percent in Bermuda and zero percent in the Cayman Islands."[44] In theory, the law would reduce the incentive for tax inversion, which is used today to obtain the benefits of a territorial tax system by moving U.S. corporate headquarters to other countries.[45]

One-time repatriation tax of profits in overseas subsidiaries is taxed at 8%, 15.5% for cash. U.S. multinationals have accumulated nearly $3 trillion offshore, much of it subsidiaries in tax-haven countries. The Act may encourage companies to bring the money back to the U.S. eventually, but at these much lower rates.[46][47]

The corporate Alternative Minimum Tax was eliminated.[45]

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Zavala said:

Maybe I'm missing something here, but I'm not picking up what your putting down.

 

The tax bill was a giveaway to corporations.

Edited by David Dennison

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

mpu


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Recruiting ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Help ... For Sale ... Politics ... Board Discussion
×
×
  • Create New...