Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 22, 2018 22:46:16 GMT -5
Well, I mean, Trump knows all about economics. Like that trade wars are good and easy to win. And this:
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2018 7:57:39 GMT -5
Want to see some real economic ignorance from someone in a position to singlehandedly wreak serious damage to our economy? Take it away, President Trump:
eta:
and then, when you discover that the policy you've enacted is hurting your base, you throw big bucks at them to try to patch it!
Big government enacts stupid, ill-conceived policy that creates problem, then big government throws a pile of taxpayer money at it to patch the self-created problem! Bravo!
Isn't this just the kind of thing conservatives are supposed to hate? This is one of areas where I agreed with classic conservatives. But today's "conservatives" have abandoned economic caution altogether.
Anyway, this is why I agree that some economic knowledge/common sense is a good thing in a candidate. But I also submit that it matters far more in someone who has the power to singlehandedly wreak havoc. In other words, economic ignorance in our economic grad POTUS is far more consequential than economic ignorance in economic grad Ms. O-C (though of course, it would be much better if both of them were up to snuff on economic issues).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 24, 2018 18:05:12 GMT -5
Like, speaking of socialism, isn't it kinda socialism for the government to pick the winners and losers economically (steel manufacturers win, soybean farmers lose), and then pay off the losers with government money?
I think this "destroy our soybean farmers with a dumb, unnecessary tariff war and then throw 12 billion at them to make it up, and hey, alienate all our allies at the same time" thing is worse than Ms. O-C's ideas, frankly.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Jul 25, 2018 16:18:11 GMT -5
Want to see some real economic ignorance from someone in a position to singlehandedly wreak serious damage to our economy? Take it away, President Trump: Fair is fair: www.cnbc.com/2018/07/25/trump-we-hope-to-work-something-out-on-a-fair-trade-deal-with-europe.htmlThis isn't meant to be a "gotcha" on Cass. But I think it only fair to point out that Trump is not Ms. O-C, when it comes business and economic knowledge. To be sure, that doesn't mean it's a good thing to have Trump in office at all, but I think it's incorrect to suppose that Trump is ignorant on this stuff. Imo, he know exactly what he is doing. And--as I think I've noted before--he's operating as if he was the CEO of America when he makes his threats re tariffs and the like. I'm sure that's how he's negotiating, as well. There are a ton of problems with such an approach imo, including the fact that he might damage large sectors of the US economy with such a process and the fact that he can also do real damage to relationships with other countries that could have profound long-term consequences. That said, imo we--as a country--have been suckers on the negotiation front for decades. Other countries--and entities like the EU--know that they can win concessions as a matter of course--and do things that the would criticize the US for doing--because the US will ultimately back off, for fear of being painted as a bully. I mean, Trump had an actual point with regard to Germany and its deal with Russia for gas. He buried it in bullshit, to be sure, and made an ass of himself in the process, but it was still there. And it was a point accepted by the previous admin almost two years ago. The larger points here, though: 1) Trump may actually "win" his tariff/trade wars, and 2) sorry, but he's not ignorant on this stuff; he just approaches it all like the narcissistic prick that he is. Unfortunately, narcissistic pricks often win out in business deals (more evidence that there's just no such thing as karma).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2018 17:02:05 GMT -5
derail/
This may be an area where we have to see what happens and meanwhile agree to disagree.
Does he know more about economics than Ms. O-C? Well, yeah, I'm sure he does, but that's hardly much of a standard, is it? And he's the freaking president, not some 28-year-old political neophyte, with the potential to do much more damage, so he should be held to a much higher standard.
Moreover, Trump has a history of not acting on knowledge and facts, but just swinging out randomly from his gut. That's just what I think he's doing with these tariffs, not playing 80-dimensional chess. But time will tell.
If the trade wars end up being beneficial or harmless, I promise I'll acknowledge it and I'll also be glad. But right now, I'm not alone in thinking that Trump's approach overall is unthinking and potentially hugely damaging to both our relationships and our economies, and that statements like "trade wars are good and easy to win" are profoundly ignorant.
I'll also note that I don't take a lot of comfort from Juncker saying what he said. For one thing, at this point, world leaders have surely figured out that flattering Trump gets you further than anything else. Unless and until things negotiations utterly fall apart, I'd be surprised if he were to say anything else. For another, the fat lady hasn't sung on that one yet. Negotiations are ongoing. Trump turns on a dime -- surely you don't dispute it. We'll see what happens. Again, I sincerely do hope for the best (obviously, our economy crashing would suck and I don't want it to happen). But Trump being Trump, I fear for the worst.
I honestly give very little credit to Trump for actual economic knowledge, and I don't think he deserves it for his much-touted business past. And to the extent he does have such knowledge, I don't think that it's the primary thing that governs his actions. This is a guy who has multiple bankruptcies, who ran a casino into the ground, who is known for exaggerating his wealth (since he won't release his tax returns, we don't know by how much), and so forth. Me, I am not impressed, and I think when and if more of his dealings are revealed we're likely to see a lot more grifting and WTF than we are wise, considered business acumen.
I don't think he implemented these tariffs based on a sound and serious economic evaluation. I think he's acting on whims and grudges and pandering to the base. As per usual. Sure, it could turn out all right anyway. Anything could happen. Time will tell.
Gotta ask --
As a conservative, you aren't giving at least a bit of side-eye to Trump creating havoc for soybean farmers with his tariffs, and then throwing billions at them to subsidize them?
To me (a social liberal/libertarian but with some sympathy for certain conservative economic principles), this seems like everything conservatives have always condemned: picking winners and losers in an economy, and then throwing money at the losers who are only losers because your policy created the problem in the first place.
That was the one that really stuck in my craw.
|
|
|
Post by celawson on Jul 25, 2018 18:32:04 GMT -5
No surprise I agree with Rob. I think Trump is right in trying to correct this imbalance. Our goods deficit was $812 billion in 2017. www.bea.gov/newsreleases/international/trade/2018/pdf/trad0118annual_fax.pdfIf Trump can even correct a part of this, the $12 billion he's throwing at soy bean farmers wil be a drop in the bucket. (It's under 1.5% of $812 billion) The world today is very different from immediately post-WWII when the U.S. was the country in the position to help the others struggling to recover from war. That was the right thing to do then. But now? Heck, our goods deficit with Germany alone was $64 billion in 2017. And that's just one small example. Why should we allow that to continue? www.thebalance.com/trade-deficit-by-county-3306264 As far as the methods to correct this, I think he's treating this negotiating like the bull-in-a-china-shop person and businessman he is, going in tough and drastic and damn the immediate consequences, and that means risk which may pay off or may not. Yes, he's gone bankrupt before, but he's also rebuilt his empire after that, so he gets credit from me for knowing something about business. The news today from the Rose Garden tells me his strategy might pay off. I honestly do think Trump gets some things accomplished because he's willing to go where others won't, and he keeps "normal" politicians off balance. But I also acknowledge that some Americans are going to get hurt in the interim, whether by loss of jobs or by paying more. Hopefully it's temporary and a means to a more prosperous end.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2018 18:44:53 GMT -5
We are now getting deep into a derail that is moving far afield of Ms. O-C. I admit I started it. In my defense I'd intended it as a passing point and not a deep debate on Trump's tariff policy, which I think we have a thread for it. In my non-defense, it was completely foreseeable that it would turn into a discussion entirely about Trump's tariff policy. But may I suggest to the extent we're going to debate the tariff policy in detail we start a new thread for it, or find the old one, lest we incur The Fearsome Wrath of Optimus for once again derailing his thread? (That's actually why I tried in my last comment there to turn back around and tie my Trump comments to Ms. O-C and explain why I'd compared them in the first place. Whether or not you two love the tariff policy and think it will be awesome, a lot of economic experts are shrieking about it and about Trump's economic-related tweets. I'll cite some, if you want to go into it, but we should start another thread in that event. Ms. O-C has no actions or accomplishments yet, good or bad, for us to access, so all we're assessing are her dumb-ass words. If you do the same with Trump, he does not fare well.) ETA: Fine, a couple of quick cites of conservatives (not liberals) condemning the tariffs, only so you don't think I pulled the assertion out of my ass that many people are screeching about what a bad idea they are and the whole trade war thing is. (I'm big on people not thinking I pull stuff out of my ass.) Note that this was a one minute search on just The National Review, I can come up with PILES of these, and not from socialists and liberals. Also note that the guys below aren't all just NeverTrump conservatives, either. But, truly, if you want to discuss them, we should start another thread. www.nationalreview.com/2018/07/trump-trade-war-farmers-bailout-end-tariffs/www.nationalreview.com/corner/trump-administration-announces-aid-to-farmers-hurt-by-tariffs/www.nationalreview.com/news/trump-tariffs-plan-foreign-cars-25-percent/(The joke is, my opinion on this IS the conservative consensus! This is one of the areas where I have conservative leanings. I'm all on board with them. What Trump is doing is AGAINST the conservative consensus, including opinions from his own advisers. That was basically my point in bringing this up in the first place -- conservatives and economists are certainly scoffing at Ms. O-C's policies, but they're screaming about some of Trump's, too, especially this one.) ETA: Okay, one more. A recent poll of economists shows that only 12% of them thought Trump's tariff and trade policies would help the economy. 76% thought they would hurt the economy. Maybe they'll end of being wrong. But again, my point was that economists don't think much of Trump's trade/tariff policies.
|
|
|
Post by Christine on Jul 25, 2018 19:32:30 GMT -5
May need a new thread since Don will be along shortly to point out government is breaking our legs and handing us crutches once again. I'm personally in the wait-and-see camp at this point. Meanwhile, I do very much like reading members' opinions/debates on matters of this (the economic) sort.
|
|
|
Post by robeiae on Jul 26, 2018 7:43:17 GMT -5
Moreover, Trump has a history of not acting on knowledge and facts, but just swinging out randomly from his gut. That's just what I think he's doing with these tariffs, not playing 80-dimensional chess. But time will tell. Well, it's hardly one or the other. Again, I think Trump is approaching this stuff just he would if he was operating as the head of his own company. His approach isn't sophisticated. Indeed, it's downright meat and potatoes. Like the soybean stuff. China threatens to stop buying (its attempt to counter Trump) and Trump responds with a "fine, I'll pay the farmers out of my own pocket" (and of course it's not really his pocket). Again: Trump just approaches this stuff like the narcissistic prick that he is. Me, I don't think we should be subsidizing farmers. And as I said, there are really dangers to Trump's approach. But the point is, he's not ignorant on this stuff at all. Your comparison to Ms. O-C doesn't work here. Sure, Trump as President can do waaaay more harm than Ms. O-C as Congresscritter. And sure, Trump has demonstrated that his approach to many, many things creates real problems for the country. But that's not a function--in my view--of a lack of knowledge on economic matters at all. Doesn't mean Trump is an economic and business genius, to be sure.
|
|
|
Post by maxinquaye on Jul 26, 2018 8:08:22 GMT -5
/derail intensifies
People generally underestimate the good old drunk, Jean Claude Juncker. Sure, he's a bit of an embarrassment, as he stumbles between the claret and the Rioja. Sometimes I think he's doing it on purpose, to mask that he's actually quite clever.
So, what's the whole "deal" about? If you ask me, he wants to get us past November without blowing up the trading order. In November, he banks on the House and/or the Senate flipping. When it does, Trump will be preoccupied by other things than ranting and starting wars on Twitter.
And even if that doesn't come to pass, Trump will be in the lame-duck period until the next presidential elections. This buys time, rather cheaply, until you people elect someone sensible again. And if you don't elect someone sensible, well that EU-Mercosur trade deal is being negotiated right now. That means that the European Union will be adjacent to a big trade block of nearly 300 million people in the Americas, and have free trade with them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2018 8:14:13 GMT -5
I agree with Max -- I saw this as a "kick the can down the road" deal, not a triumph. I don't at all see how Trump's trade war shenanigans have put the U.S. in a better place now--and I think ultimately they are far more likely to put us in a worse place both economically and with our allies. I'm glad to see the can kicked--but that does not demonstrate Trump's economic savvy at all. It's far more a demonstration of Juncker's diplomacy--as I noted, world leaders have figured out how to get around him.
ETA:
Sorry, Opty. When I am at my desk and have a minute, I'll move the non-O-C related stuff to another thread.
|
|
|
Post by maxinquaye on Jul 26, 2018 8:19:23 GMT -5
/derailing the derail of the derail
I'm actually rather curious about how an EU-Mercosur trade deal will go.
If you look at a map of South America, you will notice a little piece of the European Union on it. French Guiane is a region of France, and it's where we fire off our rockets. That means the European Union has an external border with Brazil. And from Brazil it's just a hop, skip, and a jump to Uruguay and Argentina (both members of Mercosur). Not to forget all the Dutch and French islands of the Caribbean, who are either autonomous (that is, not members of the EU but associated) or full regions of their parent countries (and thus part of the EU).
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2018 8:41:24 GMT -5
Okay -- this discussion now has its own home. Carry on!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 26, 2018 8:51:24 GMT -5
/derailing the derail of the derail I'm actually rather curious about how an EU-Mercosur trade deal will go. If you look at a map of South America, you will notice a little piece of the European Union on it. French Guiane is a region of France, and it's where we fire off our rockets. That means the European Union has an external border with Brazil. And from Brazil it's just a hop, skip, and a jump to Uruguay and Argentina (both members of Mercosur). Not to forget all the Dutch and French islands of the Caribbean, who are either autonomous (that is, not members of the EU but associated) or full regions of their parent countries (and thus part of the EU). I can't begin to predict how trade is going to shake down around the world, what with Trump, Brexit, and everything else, What I see a lot of is people screeching that the status quo is terrible for their own country (very often based on misleading, out-of-context, incomplete, or downright false information) and eager to tear it down -- but without any workable, coherent, thought-out plan for instating a new order.
|
|
|
Post by maxinquaye on Jul 26, 2018 9:00:35 GMT -5
|
|