Between changes in monetary policy and consumer attitudes towards spending, much of the data itself appears to have lost meaning over the years. The "Great Recession" and how we proceeded afterward might have been the best illustration yet. So if current windows into our economy have little meaning when it comes to questions like "are we economically getting what we want?", "how long will things be relatively stable", and "what's the long term outlook on our economic health?", and with as many people as unhappy as they were with the election results, the last thing that should be a surprise is the polling results shown here.
Under Republicans the rich get richer.
Under Democrats it is the opposite. Just ask the folks in Silicon Valley and Hollywood.
Under Democrats it is the opposite. Just ask the folks in Silicon Valley and Hollywood.
1
Trump's Cabinet picks have more wealth than third of American households combined
8
Trump hired successful people. Would you have preferred losers?
1
I would have preferred people with ethics, intellect, and compassion. His people have none. Success does not necessarily discount decency, wisdom, and common sense, but trump somehow managed to pull the worst destroyers out of his baseball cap, and put them in positions where they can do the worst damage. And I don't think it was by accident, no siree...There are successful people with integrity and character, but trump picked those with traits that mirror his own. No integrity. No character. No ethics. No common sense. No intellect. No decency. No morality. Only greed, thievery, self-absorption, mendacity, corruption, buffoonery, elitism...an orgy of disgrace.
9
I would prefer anyone but the crony capitalist conservatives and alt-right fanatics that we got.
8
For the majority the forecast is cloudy, with more cruise missiles expected at the first sign of a downturn.
13
The Trump Administration:
Government of the rich, by the rich, for the rich
Government of corporations, by corporations, for corporations
Government of the rich, by the rich, for the rich
Government of corporations, by corporations, for corporations
14
I assume you would prefer losers who need to use their positions to make money with "foundations" and "giving speeches"? I would much rather have successful people who don't need money in positions of power.
2
Like the bankers and businessmen who caused the 2008 recession??? No consequences for their mistakes. Don't need money? - all they want, all they do, all they lobby for is putting more money in their pockets, so apparently they need it and they need their friends and associates around them to make sure that they keep lining each other's pockets. Long term conservative turned independent because the facts don't bear out what you are saying.
10
Rich people who don't need money tend to want more anyway, without limit, including mine and yours. The so-called president is a textbook example of "too much is never enough" pathological greed.
8
Use to project future economics of US economy, the difference between Republican and Democrat governing.
PoliticsThatWork Change in Unemployment Rate by Party of President- Since 1945
Each party has held the presidency for the same number of years since 1945. During those years, the unemployment rate has risen 11.8% under Republican presidents and has fallen 7.2% under Democratic presidents. Unemployment has fallen during the overwhelming majority of Democratic years since 1949. Unemployment rose steadily under Republicans up until 1982, then fell during the remaining Reagan years, and then rose again under both Bush Presidents.
PoliticsThatWork Dow Jones Performance by the Party of the President
During the most recent 15 years during which Republicans have held the presidency, the value of the Dow has increased by 42%. During the Democratic presidencies, it has increased by 609%- 14.5 times faster. The average growth in the value of the Dow under Democrats during this period has been 14.75% and under Republicans it has been 5.11%.
PoliticsThatWork Change in Disposable Income Since 1930 by the Party of the President
In the 44 years that we have had Democratic presidents since 1930, the real per-capita disposable income has increased 271%. During the 40 years during which we have had Republican presidents, it has increased 44%. On average, it has increased 3.1% (after adjusting for inflation) under Democratic presidents and 1% under Republican presidents.
PoliticsThatWork Change in Unemployment Rate by Party of President- Since 1945
Each party has held the presidency for the same number of years since 1945. During those years, the unemployment rate has risen 11.8% under Republican presidents and has fallen 7.2% under Democratic presidents. Unemployment has fallen during the overwhelming majority of Democratic years since 1949. Unemployment rose steadily under Republicans up until 1982, then fell during the remaining Reagan years, and then rose again under both Bush Presidents.
PoliticsThatWork Dow Jones Performance by the Party of the President
During the most recent 15 years during which Republicans have held the presidency, the value of the Dow has increased by 42%. During the Democratic presidencies, it has increased by 609%- 14.5 times faster. The average growth in the value of the Dow under Democrats during this period has been 14.75% and under Republicans it has been 5.11%.
PoliticsThatWork Change in Disposable Income Since 1930 by the Party of the President
In the 44 years that we have had Democratic presidents since 1930, the real per-capita disposable income has increased 271%. During the 40 years during which we have had Republican presidents, it has increased 44%. On average, it has increased 3.1% (after adjusting for inflation) under Democratic presidents and 1% under Republican presidents.
17
If the banking regulations get rolled back, we'll be in for another recession like the one Obama just got us mostly out of. People are still feeling the pain of that and yet some lawmakers are ready to put us back on that track. Worry seems more rational than optimism to me. It'll probably take a decade to manifest, so they'll get a pass for now.
15
Maybe deregulation ill get us out of Obama's sluggishness.
1
Small business are hoping for less ridiculous regulation thus more optimistic. Look up insane ADA regulation like pool chair lifts costing thousands and hardly ever used. There is an industry of lawyers whose sole purpose is to sue for ADA non compliance, which are insane in complexity to begin with.
Congress makes the law.
You elect Congress.
I use the pool chair lift at our municipal pool four times a week.
So do almost 100 other people.
Why do you want to deny the elderly and handicapped access to safe exercise and recreation?
You elect Congress.
I use the pool chair lift at our municipal pool four times a week.
So do almost 100 other people.
Why do you want to deny the elderly and handicapped access to safe exercise and recreation?
14
Because that is what republicans do. Deny the poor, deny the elderly, deny the handicapped...Give only to the rich, the powerful, the influential, the reprehensible.
5
Being divided isn't so bad, if only people would keep their mouth shut about it and stop trying to convince the other side they're wrong. It's just like driving . . . You stay on the left and I'll stay on the right, just so long as you stay out of my way. As far as governing, now we know why the world has dictators.
1
Historically the economy does better under
Democratic leadership. We will see how much jobs are created with trickle-down economics and tax breaks for corporations under Republican leadership. The economy is already showing signs of cooling down months after Trump took office.
Republican voodoo economists is already at play.
Democratic leadership. We will see how much jobs are created with trickle-down economics and tax breaks for corporations under Republican leadership. The economy is already showing signs of cooling down months after Trump took office.
Republican voodoo economists is already at play.
9
The first sentence of this article is hilarious. Economics is a field shaped largely by ideology, not by hard numbers.
6
We've had a boom throughout the Obama administration, but FOX and its minions never covered it, so Trump's followers think it never happened.
24
frequent flier
Don't bet on it.
Don't bet on it.
1
if 20 million people loses their health insurance, its a guarantee those people will stop spending money
12
The big hole in the bucket is the long term unemployed, great swaths of whom need to be hired on the double and retrained. As long as the freerider economy goes on, with no one pitching in to fix yesterday's problems, we will all suffer and float under the waves. I hope some company finally wakes up, accompanies similar brethren, and starts the hiring/training of long term unemployed and those left out of the workforce for so long.
Every year since 2011 I have expected it to happen and for us to get back on our feet, but employers are so lazy and cheap nowadays. They couldn't be bothered to spend a real dime on human resources or anything. This problem is a big part of the no-recovery over the last 8 years. Sure, Obama may have over-regulated some, not a good compromiser, or legislator, not good with the congress (though Trump is proving that is fools' gold now). But when are employers going to pitch in?
I am having quite enough of businesses who won't hire anyone without 6 years of experience, and are trying to put a whole generation of recent college grads under to save costs for tomorrow. Pick up your shovel and get to work, train those IT skills, build those employees of the future, or we will be intellectually bankrupt tomorrow.
Productivity will never jump back up unless we pick these people up off of the street and start molding them. A lot of the patriarchy/good ol' boys stuff needs to go, we need a modernized economy that does the work to succeed.
Every year since 2011 I have expected it to happen and for us to get back on our feet, but employers are so lazy and cheap nowadays. They couldn't be bothered to spend a real dime on human resources or anything. This problem is a big part of the no-recovery over the last 8 years. Sure, Obama may have over-regulated some, not a good compromiser, or legislator, not good with the congress (though Trump is proving that is fools' gold now). But when are employers going to pitch in?
I am having quite enough of businesses who won't hire anyone without 6 years of experience, and are trying to put a whole generation of recent college grads under to save costs for tomorrow. Pick up your shovel and get to work, train those IT skills, build those employees of the future, or we will be intellectually bankrupt tomorrow.
Productivity will never jump back up unless we pick these people up off of the street and start molding them. A lot of the patriarchy/good ol' boys stuff needs to go, we need a modernized economy that does the work to succeed.
3
Those jobs arw in India and Asia.
Don't hold your breath waiting.
Don't hold your breath waiting.
4
How do consumers feel about Trump corporations buying every bite of data on their online identities, purchases, every bit of information owned by other corporations all going into Trump's secret database for hackers in Russia? All data is for sale. There is no privacy unless you disconnect and shut down everything.
7
So...Does one group tend to be more correct than the other? For example, are the Republicans usually right? Or are the optimists usually in the know?
2
It is a process defined as “divide and conquer”.
2
On personal level, seeing regulations rolled back so soon after '08 crash, plus the obvious tax cuts for the wealthy even if millions at bottom of society lose healthcare, plus Ryan's known target of Medicare and Social Security---we have totally tightened our belts and changed our spending.
The market rose in 'irrational exuberance' at hope of rules/regs elimination by Trump. It has hit bumps as healthcare faltered and will hit more but I expect another crash, with mean-spirited GOP at the helm protecting big money as their only priority. Makes one scared to spend at all.
The market rose in 'irrational exuberance' at hope of rules/regs elimination by Trump. It has hit bumps as healthcare faltered and will hit more but I expect another crash, with mean-spirited GOP at the helm protecting big money as their only priority. Makes one scared to spend at all.
22
In the comming years as automatiom takes over millions more will be unemployed. Drivers & manufacturing. Dont become fond of that Uber job it will go away!
9
Driver is the number one job in every state in America. This figure includes all delivery, trucks, taxis, busses and couriers. Self driving vehicles could replace them all.
7
20 individuals on the forbes richest americans list own more wealth than the bottom 150, 000, 000 combined
the view of the economy of those 20 is rosier than the view of the 150, 000, 000
much rosier
18
Good good article. Both Bloomberg and Barron's look at the economic numbers and notice a divergence between soft data (as in surveys) and hard data (middle class Income has stalled, the working stiffs have no union any more, the robots are coming, Artificial Intelligence is plum scary, and income equality may stall demand for a generation: things like that). When will the soft data catch up to the hard data? Every thing that rises must converge.
I have lived through so much: the savings and loan debacle, the junk bond collapse, the real estate collapse. Some economic upheaval is slouching toward Bethlehem waiting to be born--count on it. If I have a hard data number to worry about it's student loans, we are talking a trillion here and they cannot pay it back--and with a student loan there nothing to foreclose on. One hard data number is the upsurge in subprime car loans, but you can repossess a car. A student loan default is empty air. The money disappears, demand pluments. There might be your 5% drop in consumer spending. The Trump bump may be a mirage. Depend on it, something bad is coming. Enjoy your Trump Tomahawk high ($30,000,000 in missiles to revenge 150 beautiful babies after 55,000 babies killed with chlorine barrel bombs and another $30,000,000 to replace the Tomahawks used): ENJOY. So it goes on and on.
I have lived through so much: the savings and loan debacle, the junk bond collapse, the real estate collapse. Some economic upheaval is slouching toward Bethlehem waiting to be born--count on it. If I have a hard data number to worry about it's student loans, we are talking a trillion here and they cannot pay it back--and with a student loan there nothing to foreclose on. One hard data number is the upsurge in subprime car loans, but you can repossess a car. A student loan default is empty air. The money disappears, demand pluments. There might be your 5% drop in consumer spending. The Trump bump may be a mirage. Depend on it, something bad is coming. Enjoy your Trump Tomahawk high ($30,000,000 in missiles to revenge 150 beautiful babies after 55,000 babies killed with chlorine barrel bombs and another $30,000,000 to replace the Tomahawks used): ENJOY. So it goes on and on.
9
Anyone who's been following Bernie Sanders for the last year or so will have no trouble figuring this out. This economy has not improved for many people and a good number of them still believe Trump's promises to restore their jobs. At the same time, the wealthy people who support the Republican Party are rubbing their hands at the prospect of rampant deregulation, tax cuts and an even bigger slice of the pie.
People who followed Hillary Clinton, many of whom have benefitted to some extent from the recovery, are just dazed, confused and still trying to figure out how the barbarians made it past the gates. Maybe they'd be coping better if Clinton had communicated even the slightest understanding of the very uneven recovery we've experienced since 2009.
People who followed Hillary Clinton, many of whom have benefitted to some extent from the recovery, are just dazed, confused and still trying to figure out how the barbarians made it past the gates. Maybe they'd be coping better if Clinton had communicated even the slightest understanding of the very uneven recovery we've experienced since 2009.
12
An interesting theme of the LEFT is that government and business owe jobs and a comfortable income to those whose jobs have been lost to the evolutions in business and society. A theme of the RIGHT is that they don't owe a decent standard of living to anyone and shouldn't be taxed for those purposes. The latter says, "no work, no eat." The unmarried woman who barely finished high school, has not finished junior college or trade school, is behind on debt payments for the latter, works a minimum wage job, and gets pregnant wants to be paid maternity leave, be given free housing, nutritional supplement funds, and free Medicaid health care. Oh, she may want to return to working a decent job, may aspire to finishing her education, and may aspire to getting a better job....hopefully, she will. By comparison, the hard working garage door technician who works 70-80h/wk says, "not out of my paycheck!" Where is balance?
3
This isn't about LEFT or RIGHT. When you distribute income to those with low assets, they spend it on goods and services. One way to do that is with a raise, another way is with more jobs that are above the very bottom. For instance, rather than one hard working garage door tech working 80 hrs/wk, you could have two working 40 hrs/wk each. When they spend money on goods and services, that then provides jobs to even more workers in businesses such as retail, restaurants, tourism, home improvement, etc. When a greater share of the wealth is going to those who are already wealthy, you have asset bubbles. How much shopping can rich people do? How many meals, how many vacations? The money is 'invested' in purchasing the best real estate and more of it, an overvalued stock market and more companies buying back their stocks and decreasing what is available on the open market for the small investor, and throwing it into Treasury notes as safety, thereby depressing the return on bonds. Large amounts of money involved in a small amount of transactions does not help the broader economy.
10
Your hard working garage door technician may have a valid complaint if he has never had extramarital sex in his life, never had a serious accident or illness, never spent more than he earned, never was in the wrong place at the wrong time, never got taken in by a conman or lost money gambeling or .... I don't know anyone that perfect and neither do you. We all make mistakes. That's why we all try to help each other out, and paying a bit more in taxes to help others in need is just one way of doing that.
If you've got money in 'the bank' you believe the economy is doing splendidly, but if your living pay cheque to pay cheque the economy's not so hot. Top 10%, you've got your dream administration!
8
As the corporate media transitions from the so-called "enemy of the people" (in Trump's parlance) towards an enabling and normalizing entity, there will be many people for whom this type of reporting will seem increasingly "unreal" or fantastical.
Of course, reporting on the economy, on jobs, on industries, is part of what a free and independent media should do. But the fact remains that the Trump administration is not "normal," at least when compared to the usual level of corruption that exists in the typical "Neoliberal" system (in the U.S., U.K., France, etc.)
The current administration has broken all previous governance "molds" in that it has fully transitioned the entire system into what is essentially an authoritarian (could also be called proto-fascist) nepotist kleptocracy.
Knowing this, many a man (and woman) must be felling like Winston ("1984"), asking one self, "how's is it possible that everyone is going along with this as it was all normal?"
Getting back to issues related to economics, I'd point out that under fascist systems, monopolies, oligopolies, financial cartels, and the corporate media usually thrive, immensely. For more on this, I suggest people read the WikiPedia entry for "Economics of Fascism."
Of course, reporting on the economy, on jobs, on industries, is part of what a free and independent media should do. But the fact remains that the Trump administration is not "normal," at least when compared to the usual level of corruption that exists in the typical "Neoliberal" system (in the U.S., U.K., France, etc.)
The current administration has broken all previous governance "molds" in that it has fully transitioned the entire system into what is essentially an authoritarian (could also be called proto-fascist) nepotist kleptocracy.
Knowing this, many a man (and woman) must be felling like Winston ("1984"), asking one self, "how's is it possible that everyone is going along with this as it was all normal?"
Getting back to issues related to economics, I'd point out that under fascist systems, monopolies, oligopolies, financial cartels, and the corporate media usually thrive, immensely. For more on this, I suggest people read the WikiPedia entry for "Economics of Fascism."
7
It's interesting that just above this article is the one....
"Bannon’s Views Tied to Book That Warns, ‘Winter Is Coming’"
So, to be clear, just who, exactly, are the pessimists?
"Bannon’s Views Tied to Book That Warns, ‘Winter Is Coming’"
So, to be clear, just who, exactly, are the pessimists?
4
I have been very bullish on the stock market since 2009, but I’m rather morose about the economy. Much consumer confidence can be attributed to the re-inflation of stock prices and house values. It has a wealth effect on people. But, the Federal Reserve lowered short-term interest rates to near zero and expanded its balance sheet dramatically with bond purchases to make that happen. Now, they want to start pulling that back. If asset values start to decline again due to the strengthening of the dollar and earnings expectations fail to materialize at big companies, the mood could change rapidly.
6
Talked to a Trump voter today; said her working class self-employed family is paying $22,000/yr. premium for healthcare for 3, not counting co-pays/deductibles. While I am a Democrat, I look at Obamacare which gave insurance to poorer people and ponder how it helps that family, except very indirectly. My own daughter just out of college made $38,000/yr last yr and paid $450/month premiums for medical insurance. 1/5 of of her post-tax income for one thing? She was too "wealthy" for the subsidy.
Exactly why is it that Democrats don't get about taxes and such choking middle class families? Are Democrats ALL rich w/o care and poor getting gov't $?
Exactly why is it that Democrats don't get about taxes and such choking middle class families? Are Democrats ALL rich w/o care and poor getting gov't $?
2
What was their insurance cost before the ACA? How much did they get in tax subsidies for that insurance? Just quoting the gross cost doesn't necessarily tell the whole story.
5
The horrific truth is that about 1/3 of most private health care premiums are diverted to cover indigent care, called cost shifting. Or, to put it another way, Medicare/Medicaid pays about 55% of health care dollars spent but underpays the cost of the care that they pay for. The 42-43% who are private-Insurance covered pay a substantial part of gov't sponsoreds' costs. That said, the cost of health care is huge, now, largely because of the costs of medicines, hardware, and hospital-based care systems and structures. Research has provided some pretty incredible health positives but not without enormous costs. Part of the problem of affording our health care costs is the ability to dodge buying insurance. Another major factor is gentrification: too few taxpayers by ratio compared to retirees, indigent, and disabled persons spending more than they contributed or will contribute to the system. The bottom line is that many approaches will be needed to make health care more broadly affordable.
5
Because the medical mafia insurance,major pharma, major hozpital companies have a strangle hold on costs and profits. There is no accoutability or transparacy at all! Thats the way the crooks in congress want it!
8
Regardless of what partisans think, or what Krugman thinks, investors are optimistic. Bigly.
1
Al Dr Krugman does is bleat out Republicans bad; Democrats good. He is consumed with hatred.
2
To me, it depends on whether or not you watch Fox News. Watch Fox for a day and the difference is clear.
Me?
I'm benefitting from the New Economy. Some folks in very rural areas aren't. That's the key to Democrats chances in 2018. They've got a lock on most large cities with Universities, now they have to focus on getting smaller towns jobs that pay well.
If we survive Citizen Trump, that is.
Me?
I'm benefitting from the New Economy. Some folks in very rural areas aren't. That's the key to Democrats chances in 2018. They've got a lock on most large cities with Universities, now they have to focus on getting smaller towns jobs that pay well.
If we survive Citizen Trump, that is.
5
And they wear their ignorance proudly.
Let's have a parade for them...bread and circuses to distract, maybe a few bombs or better yet..a missile parade.
Whatever keeps them happy.
The last 8 years were ok - could have been better with a less obstructive congress...so what do they come up with, "TrumpCare".
I think I will raise my savings rate...this is not going to get better
Let's have a parade for them...bread and circuses to distract, maybe a few bombs or better yet..a missile parade.
Whatever keeps them happy.
The last 8 years were ok - could have been better with a less obstructive congress...so what do they come up with, "TrumpCare".
I think I will raise my savings rate...this is not going to get better
7
Or we could have spent the $79 million we wasted on the Tomahawk missiles on infrastructure or health care subsidies or.....
7
the cost of the missiles alone was about $ 100, 000, 000
($ 1.59 mln each )
the operational cost probably added another $ 50, 000, 000 to the total cost
1
To me these data show that people/populists on both the left and the right want a strong leader to rule or at least manage the country and the economy. And I find this as disturbing as any specific policies. What happened to individual initiative and accountability. Have you all swallowed the koolaid provided by the marketing that passes for politics in the US? Are you really ready to relinquish your independence to the next Great Leader?
2
I think the data say more about the direction of leadership than the strength. I'm not sure that the data say anything about individual initiative or accountability, either, but maybe something about which groups of people feel safer in taking the initiative and more confident that their efforts will be rewarded.
4
Paul Samuelson must be spinning in his grave. Nothing in textbooks mean anything anymore. Government statistics on employment, poverty level, inflation (which has NOTHING to do with the cost of living) have no credibility. There are three economies: the rich, the poor, and the underground economy.
8
Samuelson's textbook was for an America of the 1950s.
1
Optimism is wonderful, but follow-through is divine. "Trump's Big Moves in the First 100 Daze" amount to endless asinine tweets, administrative chaos, a thwarted travel ban, and making Obamacare better and more popular by trying to destroy it. No blueprint for infrastructure, not even crib notes . . . which amounts to idle talk and inertia, for which DJT is the Master of Ceremonies.
32
This country has lost its collective mind. The "my way or the highway" approach to governance and existence is asinine.
But that is what we have reaped. So shall we sow.
But that is what we have reaped. So shall we sow.
17
Since Republicans one and only mantra has always been government AND taxes are evil and "supply side" economics is the answer to all economic ills(despite its consistent historical failure), none of what this discussion proposes should really come as any surprise. The only surprise is why does a party with never any new ideas, other than those that serve strictly their interests and their corporate donors, ever get elected?
Of course, now for the first time in decades whereby the Republicans are in full control of all levels of government, that agenda and its affect on the country will now be exposed in "all its glory" (and horror).
Of course, now for the first time in decades whereby the Republicans are in full control of all levels of government, that agenda and its affect on the country will now be exposed in "all its glory" (and horror).
19
Amazing that people would reveal publicly voting for HIM. Shame, even embarrassment has truly left the building. Please, ask them again, in a year.
13
The rich get richer, and the GOP poor get " less educated ". As they've been very well trained to do, for decades. Mission accomplished.
34
"Republicans’ talking points centered on a 10-year low in the unemployment rate, while Democrats focused on a sharp decline in job creation."
You have the problem right there. It's indeed one Rorschach test, in which beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. Do you want to focus on the good news (and ignore the bad news), or do you want a more balanced view (mix of good and bad news) that is less rosy? If you are a solid Trump voter, OF COURSE you fall in the former camp, afterall you're voting for this candidate based on blind faith. Hope is the only thing that sustain you.
That said, we've heard it many times, that this time will be different. So, history tends to find its pattern back in our life. We are nine years from the 2008 abyss, Obama has done a lot during his eight years in office. If things are getting rosy, it's not because Trump has suddenly turned things around, it's because he's claiming credit from someone else's long, hard work.
As to whether things are looking up/down, given that most blue states in general have done far better during the past eight years of turnaround, they have a higher chance of going downhill (rather than up). As to the deep red states, they have been in doldrums for so long, they're arguably at rock-bottom. How bad can it possibly get, except to go up (however inch-by-inch it might get).
I'd bet, if you show Janet Yellen this article, she'd tell you, it's total white noise. I'm with her on that count.
You have the problem right there. It's indeed one Rorschach test, in which beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. Do you want to focus on the good news (and ignore the bad news), or do you want a more balanced view (mix of good and bad news) that is less rosy? If you are a solid Trump voter, OF COURSE you fall in the former camp, afterall you're voting for this candidate based on blind faith. Hope is the only thing that sustain you.
That said, we've heard it many times, that this time will be different. So, history tends to find its pattern back in our life. We are nine years from the 2008 abyss, Obama has done a lot during his eight years in office. If things are getting rosy, it's not because Trump has suddenly turned things around, it's because he's claiming credit from someone else's long, hard work.
As to whether things are looking up/down, given that most blue states in general have done far better during the past eight years of turnaround, they have a higher chance of going downhill (rather than up). As to the deep red states, they have been in doldrums for so long, they're arguably at rock-bottom. How bad can it possibly get, except to go up (however inch-by-inch it might get).
I'd bet, if you show Janet Yellen this article, she'd tell you, it's total white noise. I'm with her on that count.
11
Willful ignorance vs. Reality. Who would have guessed??? Well, the realists.
9
The current administration is catering to corporations and slashing consumer protections left and right. They are intentionally creating a market in which it is even easier to exploit and manipulate the general masses, who are largely uneducated by our rather dismal education system. (I teach at a community college; I have had students arrive who cannot write complete sentences and who are reading at a 3rd grade level at 20 years old.)
My husband and I vividly remember the housing bubble burst of 2008. I have an older friend who is still underwater on a house she made the mistake of buying in 2006. We expect something similar by 2025, if not sooner. It will be a major recession or even a depression.
I do most of our shopping. We agreed to significantly cut back on discretionary spending to save for the dark times ahead; we now save 60-65% of our income each month. The more we put into savings, the safer we both feel. ("Would I rather have this shirt? Or would I rather know I'll be able to pay for food and water and shelter later? I'd rather have the safety later on, so no new shirt for me! The clothes I have now fit and are functional, and that's good enough!")
We don't trust this administration at all. We also recognize that job security is non-existent anymore, so the fatter our savings, the safer we are in the long run. There are many societal issues colliding here.
My husband and I vividly remember the housing bubble burst of 2008. I have an older friend who is still underwater on a house she made the mistake of buying in 2006. We expect something similar by 2025, if not sooner. It will be a major recession or even a depression.
I do most of our shopping. We agreed to significantly cut back on discretionary spending to save for the dark times ahead; we now save 60-65% of our income each month. The more we put into savings, the safer we both feel. ("Would I rather have this shirt? Or would I rather know I'll be able to pay for food and water and shelter later? I'd rather have the safety later on, so no new shirt for me! The clothes I have now fit and are functional, and that's good enough!")
We don't trust this administration at all. We also recognize that job security is non-existent anymore, so the fatter our savings, the safer we are in the long run. There are many societal issues colliding here.
30
Excellent post , but please make sure the money you are saving isn't in a large corporate bank. If there is a run on the bank, all transfers of capital would stop.
6
The FDIC should protect one for up to a $250,000 deposit per bank...however, I don't know if I have faith in that anymore, either.
3
Thank you! We are also cutting our discretionary spending and if that is responsible for bringing on another recession -- at least an economic collapse may bring sanity back to American voters.
1
The gap between Republicans and the rest of us is they demonstrate no cognitive ability to learn from mistakes and think more than one step ahead.
MAGA is really code for, we can't keep up with progress(ives).
MAGA is really code for, we can't keep up with progress(ives).
13
The economy? Do you mean the economy that Obama salvaged after 8 years of a republican mess? Hopefully everyone can look past any smoke and mirrors from the Trump camp and the press and remember that he committed treason by colluding with an adversarial foreign government to steal an election. Keep your eye on the ball.
34
We have professional economics which is based in complex equations and millions of data points. We also have popular economic which is based on how I/you feel today with no math involved other than a perception that everything is binary 100% or 0% (I either have a job or I don't, spending money or I don't,...)
Unfortunately both have their subjective elements and therefore are subject to interpretation. So, professional economics can point to data that shows that "The Economy" is improving but if I'm unemployed right now I can discount that statement as totally bogus.
Popular economics tends to be what most of us understand and believe. Therefore, people in states where unemployment is low tend to see that I, and most of the people I know are employed and even have disposable income - I think all is well with the world. The inverse is true in states where unemployment is high - "objective reality" be damned.
We have yet to deal with the real issue of the American economy where we have a thriving wealthy class and a rapidly sinking working and unemployed class that is looking for somebody to blame when, in fact, the world economy is ever-changing and people get displaced because there is no longer a demand for what they used to get paid to do.
Consumers create jobs by spending and no company will hire people just because. Therefore, the government has to create jobs for those where the demand has disappeared. Easy to say, nearly impossible to do.
Unfortunately both have their subjective elements and therefore are subject to interpretation. So, professional economics can point to data that shows that "The Economy" is improving but if I'm unemployed right now I can discount that statement as totally bogus.
Popular economics tends to be what most of us understand and believe. Therefore, people in states where unemployment is low tend to see that I, and most of the people I know are employed and even have disposable income - I think all is well with the world. The inverse is true in states where unemployment is high - "objective reality" be damned.
We have yet to deal with the real issue of the American economy where we have a thriving wealthy class and a rapidly sinking working and unemployed class that is looking for somebody to blame when, in fact, the world economy is ever-changing and people get displaced because there is no longer a demand for what they used to get paid to do.
Consumers create jobs by spending and no company will hire people just because. Therefore, the government has to create jobs for those where the demand has disappeared. Easy to say, nearly impossible to do.
4
Over the next year, save as much money as possible. Squirrel it away, in a safe or mattress or hole in the ground. Stock up on rice and beans then wait a couple of years.
The bust that's coming down the pike is inevitable and it will knock most of us off of our feet, much worse than the last time. Trying to remove your assets out of the bank when everyone else is at the same time? Good luck.
If you have a large amount of liquid cash, move it into Canadian (or other) banks.
The bust that's coming down the pike is inevitable and it will knock most of us off of our feet, much worse than the last time. Trying to remove your assets out of the bank when everyone else is at the same time? Good luck.
If you have a large amount of liquid cash, move it into Canadian (or other) banks.
8
It took GW Bush 8 years to wreck the economy Clinton left him. Trump seems a bit disorganized so if we are lucky it will take him longer to wreck the recovery Obama accomplished. I fully expect that it will take Trump longer to really screw things up so am optimistic in the short-term, but 6-8 years out ...
Of course, Trump might surprise me, he might get it together and spoil the economy sooner.
Of course, Trump might surprise me, he might get it together and spoil the economy sooner.
23
A great Rorschach indicator can be found reading the NYT comments.
When Trump first introduced MAGA, they thought it was plagiarism.
Then they argued it was unnecessary since America was already great.
Then they claimed Trump did not believe in MAGA and it was a ruse.
They they insulted those who believed in MAGA as deplorables.
To the present, where they believe MAGA is un-American.
How did we get to this point ?
When Trump first introduced MAGA, they thought it was plagiarism.
Then they argued it was unnecessary since America was already great.
Then they claimed Trump did not believe in MAGA and it was a ruse.
They they insulted those who believed in MAGA as deplorables.
To the present, where they believe MAGA is un-American.
How did we get to this point ?
2
We asked, but Trump never answered, when, and for what reasons(s), America was "great".
3
what is MAGA? Could you speak in plain English as opposed to acronyms?
2
steve bolger
America is great. Look at our history, and you will understand..
America is great. Look at our history, and you will understand..
1
For goodness' sake, who cares what people think is going to happen to the economy? Their opinions don't matter, for the most part. Example: Bush and the Republicans helped us enter into the worst recession since the depression. Obama and the Democrats got us out of it. Did it matter at all what the average person thought?
A better story would have been written by unbiased people who seem to know something about economics, and it would use data, including the deregulation decrees set forth by Trump, to give us an educated forecast. Of course, after we see the validity of the forecast, we could decide which of those people were wrong and which were right. In a reasonable society, those steps would be very helpful.
A better story would have been written by unbiased people who seem to know something about economics, and it would use data, including the deregulation decrees set forth by Trump, to give us an educated forecast. Of course, after we see the validity of the forecast, we could decide which of those people were wrong and which were right. In a reasonable society, those steps would be very helpful.
9
When people think that the economy will do well, they spend more, and when they think it will do badly they spend less, so it becomes it has some affect on the economy, in the self fulfilling prophecy kind of way. This is why it is used as a leading indicator.
3
Opinions matter. They set expectations and influence behavior. The probkem is obama and thr democrats didnt trumpet thr economic gains. Now the gop is cheering and people feel good even ehen nothing yet has becomr better.
2
Incredibly true. It's always amazed me: the short memory of our fellow Americans and the inability to make decisions in the voting booth that reward those making decisions that payoff in the long run.
We get what we deserve.
We get what we deserve.
3
Trump is all smoke and mirrors with big claims, and a refusal to credit President Obama for his rescue of an economy that lost 4.4 million jobs during Pres. Bush's last year in office. Obama left the economy in good condition, so for a little while Trump can ride on that although job growth is going down. Trump's plan to slash so many government programs and jobs will also hurt jobs, as will the health care plan of Republicans. All of Trump's bankruptcies did not cast a shadow on a perception (and constant boasting) about his business success, nor did hiding his tax returns. Objective reality would b a welcome change for Trump and his die-hard supporters.
24
And that doesn't even take into consideration the effects of the wall and our alienation with Mexico, the import taxes, etc. All which will do damage to the economy and make everything more expensive.
5
I wonder how much of this gap can be explained by the individual's preferred source of news (i.e. Fox News vs CNN) rather than a purely partisan viewpoint.
15
Trump inherited a growing economy and low unemployment - very similar to his inherited money received from his father, Fred. While it's far too early to say what effect ultimately his "policies" will produce, it's not too early to say that he has ushered in a new era of corporate greed and crowded his cabinet with robber-barons anxious to exercise a new ideal: "ask not what your country can do for you, ask how much you can steal from the middle class before the party is over."
38
And they apparently think they'll be able to immortalize themselves and move to Mars before it blows up in their faces too.
11
The stock market probably will be okay this year, but 2018 will see a recession. The Trump followers will be shocked that an incompetent blowhard "president" who can't pass a thing out of his own party controlled Congress leads to an inevitable recession. Sad.
8
Depending how you worded the question both viewpoints are correct. Republicans will go for "fast growth" pumping money into the economy mainly through defense spending, and run a bubble, which which will stimulate economic activity for a period (maybe 4-6 years), but will end up in a bust. Everybody will feel like they are in a boom economy for awhile, but when the bust comes, only the economic and financial elite will have actually profited. Those who have money-making-money are fine with the boom-bust cycle making money at both ends. And when the system goes critical at the Financial Corporate layer, we privatize profit, and socialize the loss with taxpayer infusions. Wage-earners are better off in a steady economic environment with small but steady growth. Wage-earning Republicans have been voting against their own self interest for decades, and have been on the losing side of the class war. Then they listen to a guy like Trump, and really think he's some kind of working-man's messiah. Good luck with that.
18
I postulate that the negative economic expectation of Democrats is in fact a wish that the Trump presidency will fail. I've studied elections for more than 50 years and have never witnessed a result that was so disturbing to the losers. We who worked for the election of George McGovern in 1972 simply went on with our lives.
8
For good reason. There has never been a candidate as incompetent, corrupt, dishonest, ignorant, and autocratic as Trump. Nixon doesn't come close.
29
Yes, since I am 99% convinced that Trump is a liar and conman (by his actual record), and that his goal is to loot the country for personal gain and to create a power base by helping others loot the country, I am hoping that he will fail miserably.
If I turn out to be incorrect, then I will publicly apologize for my error, because unlike the party of "personal responsibility," I do actually take responsibility for my actions and admit my mistakes, as opposed to all of the Bush supporters who vehemently attacked anyone that said Iraq was a bad idea and that letting the big banks run amok (Bill Clinton deserves some credit for this also) would wreck the economy, and never admitted they made a mistake. They went directly from Bush is great to "stop bringing up Bush" in about thirty seconds, as soon as the 2008 election began.
If I turn out to be incorrect, then I will publicly apologize for my error, because unlike the party of "personal responsibility," I do actually take responsibility for my actions and admit my mistakes, as opposed to all of the Bush supporters who vehemently attacked anyone that said Iraq was a bad idea and that letting the big banks run amok (Bill Clinton deserves some credit for this also) would wreck the economy, and never admitted they made a mistake. They went directly from Bush is great to "stop bringing up Bush" in about thirty seconds, as soon as the 2008 election began.
11
I'm not the only one who hopes his presidency fails. He committed treason by working and colluding with a foreign, adversarial government to steal an election. I am not saying Clinton should be president. He however, is an illegitimate fraud.
9
The first job numbers that can arguably be attributed to a Trump effect are down. Why then is pessimism being presented as political staked position?
8
Just as it's easy to goose the profit of a corporation with various adjustments that provide an immediate benefit, so too with the economy.
With a corporation, there are boundaries due to GAAP and the law and shareholders, but there are no limits to the manipulation available with one party rule of the national economy. The only limitations are the government's honesty, the value placed on long-term viability, and the integrity of their numbers.
Given the Republicans' elevation of Ryan, their numbers and thus their policy prescriptions, have zero credibility. Stripping regulations from the economy, which the corporations have already funded with sunk costs, will create a disaster down the road.
Regulations have an excellent ROI because they prevent future economic disasters, not to mention that they protect against predatory acts. Note that Germany has many more regulations than the US and their economy is just fine.
Obama brought the economy back strong and that is what we're now feeling.
What will happen is what always happens with Republicans - they screw it up and profit from the mess. Democrat administrations are always far better at economics than Republicans, with many fewer recessions, lower budget deficits, smarter policy, and stronger economic and job growth.
The stock market is at a peak; soon it will fall off a cliff just as it did in 2001 and 2008.
With the Bankruptcy King as President, only an alt-reality Republican would bet on the economy.
With a corporation, there are boundaries due to GAAP and the law and shareholders, but there are no limits to the manipulation available with one party rule of the national economy. The only limitations are the government's honesty, the value placed on long-term viability, and the integrity of their numbers.
Given the Republicans' elevation of Ryan, their numbers and thus their policy prescriptions, have zero credibility. Stripping regulations from the economy, which the corporations have already funded with sunk costs, will create a disaster down the road.
Regulations have an excellent ROI because they prevent future economic disasters, not to mention that they protect against predatory acts. Note that Germany has many more regulations than the US and their economy is just fine.
Obama brought the economy back strong and that is what we're now feeling.
What will happen is what always happens with Republicans - they screw it up and profit from the mess. Democrat administrations are always far better at economics than Republicans, with many fewer recessions, lower budget deficits, smarter policy, and stronger economic and job growth.
The stock market is at a peak; soon it will fall off a cliff just as it did in 2001 and 2008.
With the Bankruptcy King as President, only an alt-reality Republican would bet on the economy.
17
"Dynamic scoring" means no benchmarks, but Ryan doesn't even believe in relativity.
5
I protested the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, it did not take any great intellect to realize that these actions were a terrible idea. Why do I feel the same way about this administration? To run something as complex as a country, I would think you need resources and a plan. Vacant government agencies, for whatever reason, limits your resources. Further I would I assume that having no cogent, appropriate and positive plan not only compromises this administrations ability, but increases the danger for it to handle unforeseen situations as they arise. This was made clear by the most recent actions, Trump does not care enough about Syrian children to provide them refuge here in the US, but claims his care for them was the reason he fired over 50 rockets into their country. What is happening in the world is chaotic enough, I'm not sure how having an incompetent administration is going to lead to a more stable egalitarian economy for the average Trump voter.
22
As interest rates go back up I will cut back on spending and pay down debt. Has zero to do with political persuasion or expectation.
6
I'd like to see the pregnancy/birth rate numbers in July and August and where they rise and where they fall if so. Might be just as telling.
9
"Mr. Summers said,'but there will still be a large divergence on what should be a matter of objective reality.'"
The objective reality, at the moment, is that there is no reality. When foreign policy about Syria flips 180 degrees in the space of one week, there is nothing Americans [or the world] can count on. And THAT, my friends, is the reason for the pessimism on the Left. Who knows WHAT is coming? No one. And that is reason to be concerned.
The objective reality, at the moment, is that there is no reality. When foreign policy about Syria flips 180 degrees in the space of one week, there is nothing Americans [or the world] can count on. And THAT, my friends, is the reason for the pessimism on the Left. Who knows WHAT is coming? No one. And that is reason to be concerned.
30
Republicans and independents are optimistic. That leaves pessimistic democrats. Hopefully, their now chronic negativity won't turn into a drag on our economy. It's enough of a drag on our country's national dialogue.
4
I believe luck favors the prudent and prepared. I see Trump as bad luck on steroids.
14
The US long survived because those who were over-favored by the distortions built into the US system trod lightly when unfairly advantaged. Unfortunately the present crowd is too stupid or arrogant to perceive need for restraint.
11
Come on! Trump is the most pessimistic president ever. He's only bullish on how great he is.
7
Still looking for the articles analyzing the job data and providing us with economic news please. A lot of liberals believe a recession is coming, not imminently, but eventually because the road is well paved and the cooks are in Trump's kitchen. How carefully was the opinion data broken down and evaluated in writing this article?
5
I'm an independent, unaffiliated voter, and what I see ahead is a little more boom, then a bust. Real estate is frothy. Many liberals and independents both spent a lot of money on values-aligned businesses, real journalism publications, and charity donations in direct response to the election of that fraud in the White House, ironically contributing to a sense of a buoyant economy coming in with the new presidency. We probably aren't going to keep that up forever.
Consumer expectations are not going to fix the massive problems of addiction and poverty in this country, not to mention climate change (which is real, ya knuckleheads). The more Republicans ignore all this, the worse it will get. Maybe it won't be this year, and obviously this administration doesn't care about our children's future, and maybe the economics professors and news reporters aren't interested in the long view, either. We are going to crash hard because our economy is based on financial froth and the military-industrial complex Eisenhower warned against, and because we're too stupid to take on our toughest problems with honesty and integrity. An uptick in hiring during one quarter, a fall in retail buying the next? That's shallow and meaningless in the long term, unless you're a soulless speculator watching your stock portfolio.
Consumer expectations are not going to fix the massive problems of addiction and poverty in this country, not to mention climate change (which is real, ya knuckleheads). The more Republicans ignore all this, the worse it will get. Maybe it won't be this year, and obviously this administration doesn't care about our children's future, and maybe the economics professors and news reporters aren't interested in the long view, either. We are going to crash hard because our economy is based on financial froth and the military-industrial complex Eisenhower warned against, and because we're too stupid to take on our toughest problems with honesty and integrity. An uptick in hiring during one quarter, a fall in retail buying the next? That's shallow and meaningless in the long term, unless you're a soulless speculator watching your stock portfolio.
76
You don't have to be a prophet (regardless of your independent label) to tell the absolute truth that, there is some boom in the future, followed by another bust. My 7yo can tell me that too, and he's a long way off from the voting booth. History tends to repeat itself, after a recovery (however weak it might be) for the past 6-7 years, we've hit excess, stock markets have property markets have soared past 2008 levels for quite some time already, we're bound to have corrections (if not outright recession), Trump or no Trump (even though I'm definitely no fan of his).
3
Simple Explanation - If you own equities you are feeling great about your portfolio, since the election, but nervous about a potential crash later this year.
5
Every smart trader in the world knows that you sell at the top and buy at the bottom. Only the marks get ginned up by the media gushing over an exuberant market and brokers telling everyone to buy buy buy - "You don't want to miss the run-up! It's a once in a lifetime opportunity!!"
Investors (all the little people with pensions and mutual funds) only make money going up, but traders make it both ways. Since trader money controls the market, they periodically drop it 50% (as in 2001 and 2008) to collect the investors' money. They make out like bandits and then their lobbyists rewrite the rules so they can more easily do it again - and they never go to jail.
With Trump in does anyone think they'll go to jail this time? Wall Street is salivating over their next haul. It's been about eight years and the piggy bank's been topped up to where it was in 2001 and 2008.
Investors (all the little people with pensions and mutual funds) only make money going up, but traders make it both ways. Since trader money controls the market, they periodically drop it 50% (as in 2001 and 2008) to collect the investors' money. They make out like bandits and then their lobbyists rewrite the rules so they can more easily do it again - and they never go to jail.
With Trump in does anyone think they'll go to jail this time? Wall Street is salivating over their next haul. It's been about eight years and the piggy bank's been topped up to where it was in 2001 and 2008.
1
Consumer sentiment can only be transformed to accurate economic reality that can reflect either sentiment, only when you remove hope and attitudes from the equation until actual behaviour confirms what that economic reality reflects.
And actual behaviour is predicated on the reality of whether people have more or less money available to spend.
What they think is far less important than what they have.
Something that Republicans need to understand when they take from the many who are made more needy to give more to the few who already have enough for their needs.
Then it is just a simple matter of doing the Math to determine which way things will go for the economy.
And actual behaviour is predicated on the reality of whether people have more or less money available to spend.
What they think is far less important than what they have.
Something that Republicans need to understand when they take from the many who are made more needy to give more to the few who already have enough for their needs.
Then it is just a simple matter of doing the Math to determine which way things will go for the economy.
7
The less faith people have in the future, the less likely they are to spend now.
11
Let's be honest and not waste time with all this deep and complicated economic analysis. We have devolved into a nation of teams. If your team has the ball, you are optimistic, support it without question, and oppose everything the other team does. If your team does not have the ball, you are pessimistic, but support your team without question, and oppose everything the other team does. Simple, sad, and true. No need to write long complicated articles.
14
The US really is stupid enough to reduce all of Hilbert space to a single dimension.
4
This article only proves that consumer sentiment is a meaningless measurement. 95% of the population has no idea how the economy works - what is the point of asking them how they feel? Trump voters feel good about everything because they won. That pie in the sky will be here any day now. Soon they will all get rich building the wall and picking California's grapes. Any day now. Really. There's absolutely mind boggling information that has yet to be released - you will see it coming out in the next 2 weeks.
12
There sure are plenty of fools who think the immortal government budget needs to follow the same rules as their mortal household budgets.
5
Wonder why the rank and file Republicans don't take note that things in the blue states with their progressive taxes and better social programs are doing so much better than Red states like Kansas, Alabama, etc., states that have given tax breaks to the rich and businesses and have done away with safety net programs for the poor
28
Thank you for providing real context. Yes, the high tax blue states with a generally better educated populace are doing better. That said, there a huge pockets of poverty in a state like California. Until that is addressed, the wealth disparity between the coast and inland California will continue to sadly exist. Low taxes and defunding needed programs is always LOUSY economic policy. I have no faith in the current TP/GOP, Wall Street backed administration will ultimately improve the economy. The stock market could be stratospheric, that means nothing if you can't afford your life!
6
It is mind-boggling. They believe government is a money incinerator, not a money pump.
4
A market can become stratospheric because of scarcity. Many managements are using very cheap money to buy up their own company's stock these days.
Shareholders? We are just pests.
Shareholders? We are just pests.
1
Mr. Schwartz promises us a bit of corrective, objective reality and delivers the same old "he, said, she said", never even mentioning Trump claiming credit for positive first quarter reports that still reflect the achievements of the Obama administration.
Reminder: there's a madman in the White House facing criminal investigations, including collusion with the Russian government to steal a U.S. election. Even the "mainstream" media seems eager to forget.
Reminder: there's a madman in the White House facing criminal investigations, including collusion with the Russian government to steal a U.S. election. Even the "mainstream" media seems eager to forget.
14
Something much more important than what people think is a mute what people have and is that which will determine whether any consumer confidence is made reality by having more money to create that confidence that translates into increased spending.
This is especially fundamental if the results are showing those who have suffered more (maybe the most?) voted for Trump and are Republicans are also those that have polled a more optimistic opinion that things will get better.
That, however is actually hope and not intent and it seems hard to think that anyone can expect "a burst of spending by bullish Republicans" if money is tight as seems most likely, especially if any tax cuts are skewed to higher earning Households, if the recent failed health care bill is any indication.
In opposition to the optimistic hope polled by Republicans, reality has so far contradicted promises for those who will be affected by Trump's Budget cuts that dispense with Meals on Wheels, School Lunches, Employment programs, Regional work initiatives and other activities that help many people, losing their funding.
Add to that the Republican Legislative moves that include removing worker protections and safety oversight, allow Investment advisors to put their interests before their customers, State laws to limit or ban cities and counties from changing minimum wages and repealing the Overtime rate Salary cap ceiling...
How can consumer spending increase when there's less money being earned?
This is especially fundamental if the results are showing those who have suffered more (maybe the most?) voted for Trump and are Republicans are also those that have polled a more optimistic opinion that things will get better.
That, however is actually hope and not intent and it seems hard to think that anyone can expect "a burst of spending by bullish Republicans" if money is tight as seems most likely, especially if any tax cuts are skewed to higher earning Households, if the recent failed health care bill is any indication.
In opposition to the optimistic hope polled by Republicans, reality has so far contradicted promises for those who will be affected by Trump's Budget cuts that dispense with Meals on Wheels, School Lunches, Employment programs, Regional work initiatives and other activities that help many people, losing their funding.
Add to that the Republican Legislative moves that include removing worker protections and safety oversight, allow Investment advisors to put their interests before their customers, State laws to limit or ban cities and counties from changing minimum wages and repealing the Overtime rate Salary cap ceiling...
How can consumer spending increase when there's less money being earned?
9
One way to get everyone to closer agreement would be to level the playing field.
Nine out of the top 10 states in federal aid received voted for Trump, and Maine split its electoral college vote. This would indicate that these states are optimistic because they know they don't have to work to get money. A bunch of state welfare queens. Alaska, Georgia and Alabama have a combined unemployment rate of over 6%.
Let's cut off our failed socialist aid experiment to those states and give them some incentive to join the states that support themselves by having their citizens gainfully employed. And as added incentive send each a bill for whatever they have gotten to date. That should get them moving!
JontheChef
Nine out of the top 10 states in federal aid received voted for Trump, and Maine split its electoral college vote. This would indicate that these states are optimistic because they know they don't have to work to get money. A bunch of state welfare queens. Alaska, Georgia and Alabama have a combined unemployment rate of over 6%.
Let's cut off our failed socialist aid experiment to those states and give them some incentive to join the states that support themselves by having their citizens gainfully employed. And as added incentive send each a bill for whatever they have gotten to date. That should get them moving!
JontheChef
9
Go ahead and era complied your bigoted analysis without military spending. All of the sudden, the numbers look a bit more level. Then account for the thieves on Wall Street. Then your numbers reverse.
The Senate looks as level as the Andes, and the Electoral College topography matches the Himalayas.
4
Economy...Schmonomy.
We are approximately 15 years into a new Age....call it the Electronic Age. No longer the Industrial Age.
And our economists are behaving like the blind men attempting to describe an elephant.
They insist on forcing the Electronic Age to conform to and behave like the previous Age.
Attempting to control an economy thru Central Planning and bureaucratic micromanagement is simply no longer relevant. And thus, so is the Tax Code completely out of sync with the Modern Age.
Example; since "employment is shrinking"(ie...salaried jobs are disappearing") why, WHY, WHY???...are we still attempting to improve things by tinkering with the "income" tax????
Yep...the income tax made perfect sense.....seventy years ago, when most ameicans had a factory job.
Now most americans are contracting or selling stuff to each other on E-bay,,,,while corporations use near-slave labor in China to make sub=standard products to sell to americans...tax free.
,,,,,
We are simply taxing the wrong functions in the new economy.
Tax the internet...sorry, kids,,,,it's not actually free....never was....never will be.
Tax Politcal Contributions....if there ever was a cash cow.....SuperPACS, Lobbyists, etc, etc...are IT.
Eliminate the obsolete definition of "offshore banking"......its a scam....we all know it.....and its time these scammers paid their fair share.............
We are approximately 15 years into a new Age....call it the Electronic Age. No longer the Industrial Age.
And our economists are behaving like the blind men attempting to describe an elephant.
They insist on forcing the Electronic Age to conform to and behave like the previous Age.
Attempting to control an economy thru Central Planning and bureaucratic micromanagement is simply no longer relevant. And thus, so is the Tax Code completely out of sync with the Modern Age.
Example; since "employment is shrinking"(ie...salaried jobs are disappearing") why, WHY, WHY???...are we still attempting to improve things by tinkering with the "income" tax????
Yep...the income tax made perfect sense.....seventy years ago, when most ameicans had a factory job.
Now most americans are contracting or selling stuff to each other on E-bay,,,,while corporations use near-slave labor in China to make sub=standard products to sell to americans...tax free.
,,,,,
We are simply taxing the wrong functions in the new economy.
Tax the internet...sorry, kids,,,,it's not actually free....never was....never will be.
Tax Politcal Contributions....if there ever was a cash cow.....SuperPACS, Lobbyists, etc, etc...are IT.
Eliminate the obsolete definition of "offshore banking"......its a scam....we all know it.....and its time these scammers paid their fair share.............
9
The reports of "lowest unemployment #s in years" STILL does not include the millions who are no longer counted- and can't find jobs.
It doesn't include the millions of who are underemployed and just barely making it.
These ppl do NOT experience an economy that is working for them-no matter how well the Stock Market is doing.
It doesn't include the millions of who are underemployed and just barely making it.
These ppl do NOT experience an economy that is working for them-no matter how well the Stock Market is doing.
12
Come now If you have low standards, don't mind that millions of US citizens who need jobs don't have them, millions more don't have an opportunity to meet either their desires or capability, and more millions are retired and not contributing their talents due to lack of opportunities is fine. If you like cheap stuff better than jobs for US citizens everything is fine. If you are a progressive or this so called news paper everything is fine. It is not.
3
Employers, today, don't has profit margin room to accept low standards. Jobs in this economy require different skills then manual labor. Manual labor is being rapidly removed from most job tasks by new technologies. Employers has millions of jobs that go unfilled every day because the millions of US citizen that are sitting at home do not have the skills needed to fill these jobs.
Who fault is that? What happen to personal responsibility?
Most of us can't demand that employers pay us anymore than their acceptable job offer or wages.
Over the course of my job career, it have been easier to get a better job, if you currently has a job.
Who fault is that? What happen to personal responsibility?
Most of us can't demand that employers pay us anymore than their acceptable job offer or wages.
Over the course of my job career, it have been easier to get a better job, if you currently has a job.
2
Clearly "Vulcanalex" has a different set of metrics from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. This needs more grounding in fact. I doubt that this is correct, but he should give it a try. Incidentally, Germany with strong unions seems to be better off. That also needs explaining.
4
Are you retired and reduced to contributing your talents here, vulanalex?
2
The economic "boom" was based was mostly a psychological trust in all of the things that Trump would accomplish. Following the dismal Health care adventure, people realized that his vague, lack of details, would probably also carry over to Tax-Reform, Infrastructure, better schools, as well.
Last month, when he grasped all the credit for the Labor Department's strong Jobs Report. This past Friday, when the DOL Report was totally dismal, Donald was able to dodge the bullet, because of the supporters who might not have thought the Missile Attack on China hrouqh.
The economy--markets, unemployment, GDP--have merely meandered, rather than really moved.
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
Last month, when he grasped all the credit for the Labor Department's strong Jobs Report. This past Friday, when the DOL Report was totally dismal, Donald was able to dodge the bullet, because of the supporters who might not have thought the Missile Attack on China hrouqh.
The economy--markets, unemployment, GDP--have merely meandered, rather than really moved.
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
3
Who will these giddy rank-and-file Republicans vote for when they wake up and discover that Trump and the Republicans will do nothing for them? There is a big opportunity here for the Democrats to win back these voters.
15
I find it flat out embarrassing even to suggest to people that they waste time to vote after standing in line for an hour last November to see my own vote made a stupid futile waste of time by the scourge of slavery that still infects this arrogant nest of self-misrepresentations.
1
The Republicans have laid out for years a yes/no answer to everything. The economy was ailing until Donald Trump won the election, and now, a few months later, it's healthy enough to encourage Republican businessmen like the owner of Dominion Trucking to invest and hire. Elsewhere, we have Stephen Bannon who believes in a book that sees a collapse coming. If it happens that will be the fault of Obama, not Donald Trump. Kindly put, this is magical thinking. Honestly put, it's paranoia. The GOP has begun talking about the Apocalypse. Enough of this invented, fake-historical crap can make for violence, fear and unreasoning suspicion of a perceived enemy, all of which leads to what is most feared. That, "(M)any Democratic states have bounced back more vigorously" than those in the Midwest and near West and South may just encourage true believers in amateur history to revisit the Civil War and attack those Democratically-controlled states. The GOP should reconsider what it's been advocating, and should consider that wishing and hoping for the failure of its opposition can lead to the failure of this country.
20
It is all about expectations. Trump has been a master of painting a rosy picture of a future with full employment, rebuilding infrastructure, deregulating business regardless of the reasons for the regulations in the first place and, most important to those who are prejudiced wasps (of which there are still many), an implicit promise to return them to the top of the middle American pecking order because of who they are by birth and look more than anything else.
After nearly 100 days the promises are still the focus of attention more than the details and plans and funding required to deliver. As the old ad says: Where's the beef?" So far there is none. Executive Orders are appetizers not the substance.
They keep the Trump supporters hopeful and try to turn back the clock to a conservative past that never was except in selective memories.
If the Trump/GOP American Healthcare Plan to replace Obamacare is any indication, there is no beef, only food poisoning in the reality of Trump's disjointed, shortsighted, simplistic approach to real programs. Expectations based on fantasy and fact less rhetoric will vanish as the reality of Trump's narcissistically driven fantasy based programs fail to deliver
That, sadly, will take much more than 100 days. And it won't happen until real pain and betrayal is inevitably experienced by those who elected him. In the meantime, the damage to all of us and our country may be severe.
After nearly 100 days the promises are still the focus of attention more than the details and plans and funding required to deliver. As the old ad says: Where's the beef?" So far there is none. Executive Orders are appetizers not the substance.
They keep the Trump supporters hopeful and try to turn back the clock to a conservative past that never was except in selective memories.
If the Trump/GOP American Healthcare Plan to replace Obamacare is any indication, there is no beef, only food poisoning in the reality of Trump's disjointed, shortsighted, simplistic approach to real programs. Expectations based on fantasy and fact less rhetoric will vanish as the reality of Trump's narcissistically driven fantasy based programs fail to deliver
That, sadly, will take much more than 100 days. And it won't happen until real pain and betrayal is inevitably experienced by those who elected him. In the meantime, the damage to all of us and our country may be severe.
10
Neil Gorsuch is just the scud ahead of the tsunami about to hit the rest of the federal judiciary.
4
The real divide in the US isn't between ideologies nor even political parties. It is in the inherent "demographic cultures."
All anyone has to do is review American History to see that Dem states weather some of the worst economic difficulties while Republican states run to the fed for funding as if it's a Republican piggy bank.
Go the GAO and you see in dollars and cents what the real economic situation is. Every Republican states pays $1 in federal taxes and gets ROI of more than that dollar. The Dem states manage on average 55 cents for their dollar. Which states are supporting whom?
Economics must be progressive. Progressives in Republican states are like the return of the unicorn herds.
So, these Republican states consistently rely on antiquated industries, military industries which requires endless for profit wars and a host of "here today, gone tomorrow" other industries they just cannot seem to sustain.
Take a look at the states that rank highest in sustainable, existing hi tech industries. When the Corn Belt decided to turn farming into a corporation, it became heavily reliant on federal funding. That bill annually for Agri Insurance is in the hundred billions and all it does is hand farmers insurance against crop failure. Then, you have the Rust Belt that has already depleted most of the resources needed for sustainable industry. These are Republican states that do not utilize progressive ideas about future jobs.
It's demographic "culture."
All anyone has to do is review American History to see that Dem states weather some of the worst economic difficulties while Republican states run to the fed for funding as if it's a Republican piggy bank.
Go the GAO and you see in dollars and cents what the real economic situation is. Every Republican states pays $1 in federal taxes and gets ROI of more than that dollar. The Dem states manage on average 55 cents for their dollar. Which states are supporting whom?
Economics must be progressive. Progressives in Republican states are like the return of the unicorn herds.
So, these Republican states consistently rely on antiquated industries, military industries which requires endless for profit wars and a host of "here today, gone tomorrow" other industries they just cannot seem to sustain.
Take a look at the states that rank highest in sustainable, existing hi tech industries. When the Corn Belt decided to turn farming into a corporation, it became heavily reliant on federal funding. That bill annually for Agri Insurance is in the hundred billions and all it does is hand farmers insurance against crop failure. Then, you have the Rust Belt that has already depleted most of the resources needed for sustainable industry. These are Republican states that do not utilize progressive ideas about future jobs.
It's demographic "culture."
10
Our country has given up on the future and what made us the great economic powerhouse. We're doubling down on dying industries, like coal, and ignoring education, infrastructure and healthcare for a population of healthy smart workers.
China is doing all the things we used to do. Investment in new technology, infrastructure, education, acknowledging climate change threatens their burgeoning coastal cities with rising sea levels.
They're cornering the markets of the future. They will be the future economic powerhouse while the U.S, like England before us, will become a former economic force.
More than Sad—Depressing.
China is doing all the things we used to do. Investment in new technology, infrastructure, education, acknowledging climate change threatens their burgeoning coastal cities with rising sea levels.
They're cornering the markets of the future. They will be the future economic powerhouse while the U.S, like England before us, will become a former economic force.
More than Sad—Depressing.
27
Bravo! Well said,...
4
“I fell out of bed when I got up in the morning on Nov. 9,” he admitted. “I didn’t quite know what I was voting for.”
A real genius!
A real genius!
19
I remember how disappointed I was when George W. won his first term. Big oil would be washing through the government with the accompanying acceleration of disruptive climate change. Little did I know George, Cheney, et.al. would lead us into the absurd war in Iraq (creation of ISIS) and preside over a Great Recession that seriously damaged many Americans (working class and middle class especially) and threatened our entire society. Now we have a reboot with the republicans and Donald. I still remember enough to be very uneasy about what's coming.
20
First of all, aren't the numbers current information and your perception is future? I can believe the current numbers but fear that Trump's policies will bring on a recession, or god forbid a depression.
Second, even with the numbers that the government puts out using the same basis, everyone discounts them one way or another. I seem to recall the unemployment numbers being pooh poohed by Trump and the Repub. as false, and now touted as "I am doing so great!" It really is a matter of perception and the theory that this is since the election is false, as it was happening all through the Obama administration
Second, even with the numbers that the government puts out using the same basis, everyone discounts them one way or another. I seem to recall the unemployment numbers being pooh poohed by Trump and the Repub. as false, and now touted as "I am doing so great!" It really is a matter of perception and the theory that this is since the election is false, as it was happening all through the Obama administration
3
One way to judge the direction of the U.S. economy is to look at the distribution of wealth and examine how quickly the rich are getting richer and how little consumers have to spend on products. Corporations even without a corporate tax break are making about 10% profit on their sales. Consumers, on the other hand, have not increased spending over the past 10 or more years. For the economy to grow, workers/consumers need to make more money so they can buy the products corporations are making. If anyone should get a tax break it is the low and middle class workers, then we could buy the products that corporations make, ensuring that the economy is growing..
20
That is a poor way to measure it. Of course in our age of automation and other areas where investments in machines are more valuable than say unskilled human labor those with capital make more than in the past.
1
One way to judge the direction of the U.S. economy is to look at the distribution of wealth and examine how quickly the rich are getting richer
2 quick facts illustrate your point
top 0.1% of Americans have almost as much wealth as bottom 90%
top 10 % of earners earn more than the bottom 50 % combined ( for the first time since record keeping began )
5
That's why I quit buying so much stuff, and started buying stocks when I could. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em.
3
The fact is businessmen are giddy under Trump and total Republican control of Congress because they buy into the myths that their businesses are held down by regulations. That these so-called businessmen don't recognize the value of regulations which keep their employees safe from workplace accidents, which keep the land, water and air clean from their businesses dumping waste products, and keep opportunities available to them as well as to their qualified competitors is just one more tragic example of voting against their own interests.
I am always amazed when I speak with owners of small businesses or for that matter executives who have basically inherited rather than earned their corporate positions. In one breath I hear them say " We in the US really know how to make businesses run well; if everything in the US were run the way I run my business, things would be done right". In the next breath they always say: "I need this subsidy to make a profit." or "This regulation on air quality needs to be removed to compete with China". or "Why can't I call workers 'assistant managers' so they can work unlimited hours without being paid overtime. Why does the government care if my retail workers do work off the clock without pay so I can compete with India?"
Of course those who like no regulations and plenty of subsidies think all their business problems will be solved by Trump. Too bad that will be just one more Trump/Republican lie. It also takes skill and brains.
I am always amazed when I speak with owners of small businesses or for that matter executives who have basically inherited rather than earned their corporate positions. In one breath I hear them say " We in the US really know how to make businesses run well; if everything in the US were run the way I run my business, things would be done right". In the next breath they always say: "I need this subsidy to make a profit." or "This regulation on air quality needs to be removed to compete with China". or "Why can't I call workers 'assistant managers' so they can work unlimited hours without being paid overtime. Why does the government care if my retail workers do work off the clock without pay so I can compete with India?"
Of course those who like no regulations and plenty of subsidies think all their business problems will be solved by Trump. Too bad that will be just one more Trump/Republican lie. It also takes skill and brains.
23
Yes it takes skill and brains, that is why we have a new team and we need to purge many current federal employees who have neither skill or brains. Most small business people don't want any subsidies, alternative energy wants them a lot.
3
Small business owners, like myself and my husband, need affordable healthcare so we can invest in our business, not send our hard-earned money to the CEOs of health insurance companies. Let me guess: you are a retired person in Florida living well and enjoying Medicare. You don't know squat.
2
Complete nonsense! Without mid-level specialists to write new regulations, nothing will happen. Trump has hired a total of zero of such persons.
We have seen this before. Big tax cuts for the wealthiest, getting rid of regulations for big business and then the huge recession that follows. We are still cleaning up after the Reagan debacle and Bush Jr. was even worse.
So, it might look good for a few years if Trump is lucky, but the huge recession is coming when the adults need to clean up all of the messes and pay our debts.
So, it might look good for a few years if Trump is lucky, but the huge recession is coming when the adults need to clean up all of the messes and pay our debts.
25
Government debts are refinanced, not repaid. Government is an immortal corporation.
Wise fiscal policy taxes and spends to move money because that creates economic product, and wise monetary policy regulates the amount of liquid money in the economy to keep its value stable with respect to repayment of loans to facilitate long term lending.
Wise fiscal policy taxes and spends to move money because that creates economic product, and wise monetary policy regulates the amount of liquid money in the economy to keep its value stable with respect to repayment of loans to facilitate long term lending.
4
More like we are cleaning up from Obama. If there is a recession then Trump will surely be a one term president and your progressives will get another chance to improve our country. I doubt that will happen. And nobody is paying off our debts, nobody.
4
Remember Sept 2008 when the stock market tanked, 500,000 jobs were lost per month and the GOP had no answers. Obama rescued the US economy. The GOP did nothing but complain after Bush II killed the economy
4
Should've voted for President Hillary Clinton and the Dems instead. Time to remove this illegitimate regime immediately now today before they do any more damage to countless lives, this nation, the Constitution, the earth, Democracy. They aren't listening and aren't going to, ever. Just look at their actions not words. For example, the removal of the diplomatic tool, the filibuster, this week on Thursday 04.06.2017 where now they can do whatever they want and no one can stop them. Basically a tyranny dictatorship. It will only get worse from here and don't fool yourselves. They must be stopped. Just like Hitler in the 1930s.
10
What type of growth are we (as a country) looking for?
The type where individual businesses innovate to create new products and compete against each other to increase market share? The type of growth where the muscle of labor and brains becomes a premium component of the formula rather than (say) financial wizardry? Where workers have the opportunity to jump ship and go to another company willing to pay more for their talents. Which in turn leaves a job opening for their previous employer which (again in turn) also needs to be filled. Growth where higher wages for workers is part of the stakeholder portfolio of shared profits?
Or is the type of growth Congress and big business looking for the kind of growth focused on wringing the most profits out of existing work forces and existing products. Even if it means forming gentlemen's agreements between companies not to hire workers from each other's companies. Evidenced in the 2010 High-Tech Employee Antitrust Litigation, defendants Adobe, Apple Inc., Google, Intel, Intuit, Pixar, Lucasfilm & Ebay, as an example.
Because since 2009 95% of all benefits fell under this second type of growth .
The type where individual businesses innovate to create new products and compete against each other to increase market share? The type of growth where the muscle of labor and brains becomes a premium component of the formula rather than (say) financial wizardry? Where workers have the opportunity to jump ship and go to another company willing to pay more for their talents. Which in turn leaves a job opening for their previous employer which (again in turn) also needs to be filled. Growth where higher wages for workers is part of the stakeholder portfolio of shared profits?
Or is the type of growth Congress and big business looking for the kind of growth focused on wringing the most profits out of existing work forces and existing products. Even if it means forming gentlemen's agreements between companies not to hire workers from each other's companies. Evidenced in the 2010 High-Tech Employee Antitrust Litigation, defendants Adobe, Apple Inc., Google, Intel, Intuit, Pixar, Lucasfilm & Ebay, as an example.
Because since 2009 95% of all benefits fell under this second type of growth .
7
Liberals believe the only way to grow an economy is public spending. Trump is planning massive infrastructure spending so they should be optimistic.
2
Trump needs to take HUGE debt for his tax cuts, infrastructure programs and military spending. Maybe he will bankrupt the US as he has in Atlantic City and elsewhere, 6 times.
1
It defies belief that this is being touted as a new phenomenon. I remember hearing conservatives claiming that the economy was going go into another recession during the 2012 campaign season and through Obama's second term.
Accusations of 'currency debasement' and the ever present 'bond vigilantes' who would be coming to punish any government spending come to mind. All of this despite huge gains in the stock market and a return of unemployment to near pre-Great Recession levels over Obama's tenure.
Trump is likely to preside over a recession at some point in his first term. The business cycle has given us a recession about once a decade and we exited the previous recession (as defined by GDP) several years ago. Trump's policies, whatever they turn out to be, can't do much of anything about this but they will partially determine the severity of it for working families.
For us regular Joes, the same advice as always applies: Save your money, and have a few months of cash reserves on hand. If you're lucky enough to hang on to your job in the next recession, try to buy assets at steep discounts from those who are convinced that the good times can never stop.
Accusations of 'currency debasement' and the ever present 'bond vigilantes' who would be coming to punish any government spending come to mind. All of this despite huge gains in the stock market and a return of unemployment to near pre-Great Recession levels over Obama's tenure.
Trump is likely to preside over a recession at some point in his first term. The business cycle has given us a recession about once a decade and we exited the previous recession (as defined by GDP) several years ago. Trump's policies, whatever they turn out to be, can't do much of anything about this but they will partially determine the severity of it for working families.
For us regular Joes, the same advice as always applies: Save your money, and have a few months of cash reserves on hand. If you're lucky enough to hang on to your job in the next recession, try to buy assets at steep discounts from those who are convinced that the good times can never stop.
3
It's wishful thinking. Those on the left want the economy to tank so they can be proven right about Trump. And those on the right want desperately for the economy to improve so they can justify their (a) animosity toward Obama; and (b) support for Trump. Whatever floats your boat.
2
Reality and perception are two different animals.
These outlooks are extreme.
Understanding the reality of having an incapable con man president, we'll just limp along until he's either impeached or just leaves. Until then, I expect the rich to get richer, the middle-class and trump voters to see no benefits, and the poor to suffer.
As for government, we need to have a full investigation of Russia's electing this moronic con man. NY Times keep the pressure on. We need those tax returns.
These outlooks are extreme.
Understanding the reality of having an incapable con man president, we'll just limp along until he's either impeached or just leaves. Until then, I expect the rich to get richer, the middle-class and trump voters to see no benefits, and the poor to suffer.
As for government, we need to have a full investigation of Russia's electing this moronic con man. NY Times keep the pressure on. We need those tax returns.
8
I'm pretty sure that "liberals" are not so much worried about the economy as they are the White Nationalism, oligarchy, pollution, climate-change-denying and the potential treason and authoritarianism that comes with "Make America Great Again" Trumpism.
Liberals tend to maintain a vision of America that is welcoming, diverse and progressive, believing in the social justice that one finds in Langston Hughes' "Let America Be America Again."
It doesn't matter how wealthy and "secure" we are if society and civilization are sacrificed.
Liberals tend to maintain a vision of America that is welcoming, diverse and progressive, believing in the social justice that one finds in Langston Hughes' "Let America Be America Again."
It doesn't matter how wealthy and "secure" we are if society and civilization are sacrificed.
11
I’d bet there will be some minor convergence,” he (Mr Summers) said, “but there will still be a large divergence on what should be a matter of objective reality.”
This may be because after all the lies and alternative facts, hardly anyone believes that objective reality is accessible these days.
This may be because after all the lies and alternative facts, hardly anyone believes that objective reality is accessible these days.
1
Democrats are in a five month funk. Their unicorn world fell apart on 11/8. It is understandable that in their desperation and depression that they would view the resulting chaos through cobalt lenses.
The Obama economy of 2016 was robust, vibrant and trending upward to the stratosphere. The debt, the deficit, the trade imbalance, the student loan vice, the off-shore corporate profits, the true unemployment, the numbers in poverty - none of these economic realities were even on Democrats' social radar.
The Trump economy of 2017 ( which is the Obama economy plus five months) is a certain Doomsday catastrophe. Like a tsunami, the reality of the structural problems of the US economy has swept the grieving Democrats further into the depths of their post election depression.
Winning is easy. Losing with character is much more difficult.
The Obama economy of 2016 was robust, vibrant and trending upward to the stratosphere. The debt, the deficit, the trade imbalance, the student loan vice, the off-shore corporate profits, the true unemployment, the numbers in poverty - none of these economic realities were even on Democrats' social radar.
The Trump economy of 2017 ( which is the Obama economy plus five months) is a certain Doomsday catastrophe. Like a tsunami, the reality of the structural problems of the US economy has swept the grieving Democrats further into the depths of their post election depression.
Winning is easy. Losing with character is much more difficult.
3
GLC:
"The Trump economy of 2017 ( which is the Obama economy plus five months)"
******
Yes, funny how all those wonderful Obamanomic indicators suddenly became harbingers of horror.
Think your characterization of "losers" sums it up perfectly. You'll never get a sore loser to acknowledge anything positive about the victor.
"The Trump economy of 2017 ( which is the Obama economy plus five months)"
******
Yes, funny how all those wonderful Obamanomic indicators suddenly became harbingers of horror.
Think your characterization of "losers" sums it up perfectly. You'll never get a sore loser to acknowledge anything positive about the victor.
2
In this "information age" opinions on the status of the economy have become more divided with people jumping on any economic fact that can be spun to support their immovable world view. In fact few people read and study enough to get an overview of the whole picture. Just before the Great Recession most economists claimed that the bubble would grow forever. Opinions were optimistic right up to the collapse.
Sticking to economic facts rather than just people's opinions of them might possibly have merit? (sarcasm intended)
The jobs reports are "fake news" in the sense that many of the jobs are low paid service worker jobs. Some involve workers who are forced to hold two positions. In order to be "non-fake news" the "jobs report" should include employment WAGES and worker INCOME. Those numbers have improved only marginally.
Moreover, the Stock Market is sitting with the highest P/E ratio since the Depression (huge bubble in other words), credit card debt levels are exceptional and the bubble in housing prices has led to second mortgages (both meaning that consumer spending levels are supported by debt rather than wages. These are the facts,"people are entitled to their own opinions but not their own facts."
Just before the Great Recession "experts" assured us that the bubble would expand forever -- it won't. And guess what! it'll be a "big surprise" when the next recession occurs. (Historically, about every 8 - 10 years in the US.)
Sticking to economic facts rather than just people's opinions of them might possibly have merit? (sarcasm intended)
The jobs reports are "fake news" in the sense that many of the jobs are low paid service worker jobs. Some involve workers who are forced to hold two positions. In order to be "non-fake news" the "jobs report" should include employment WAGES and worker INCOME. Those numbers have improved only marginally.
Moreover, the Stock Market is sitting with the highest P/E ratio since the Depression (huge bubble in other words), credit card debt levels are exceptional and the bubble in housing prices has led to second mortgages (both meaning that consumer spending levels are supported by debt rather than wages. These are the facts,"people are entitled to their own opinions but not their own facts."
Just before the Great Recession "experts" assured us that the bubble would expand forever -- it won't. And guess what! it'll be a "big surprise" when the next recession occurs. (Historically, about every 8 - 10 years in the US.)
6
The Trickle Down Economics Theory (tax cuts for the rich) that Raygun`s Stockton came up with was a miserable failure. A few years later even Stockton said it didn`t work. Now the GOP has another tax cutter for the 2%ers that they are holding their noses to support in order to get their destructive policies passed.
America , what have you done ! You have elected , sort of , a deranged conman as your president. Please do not wait 2-4 yrs to fix this.
America , what have you done ! You have elected , sort of , a deranged conman as your president. Please do not wait 2-4 yrs to fix this.
6
Welcome to the new (gilded) age--haves and have nots
3
I think you're burying the lead: Democratic policies may in fact drive economic growth. Here's what I infer from your essay: If Democratic majority states have a thriving economy, and Republican dominated states are failing, and the tendency to be Democratic or Republican is not based on experience of the economy, but on personality (Republicans score much, much higher on authoritarianism vs Democrats), can't we conclude that economic growth is associated with Democratic policies, ideology? Let's look at the data from the Clinton and Obama years.
5
Sorry, but the March Employment report shows that Trump's pro-growth agenda is a lie. I actually would have liked to see Trump create jobs no matter how much I dislike him personally, but his tax plan can't create jobs. It has massive tax cuts to wealthy Wall Street banksters financed by stealing money from job-creating infrastructure programs, healthcare, and other essential programs. Forget economics; it's just bad basic math. No matter how much Republicans "feel good" about Trump, job numbers already show things are getting worse. Only 98,000 jobs were created in March, vs 180,000 expected, and the amount of jobs created in January and February were substantially downgraded. Worse, of the few jobs created, most are part-time. 3 weeks ago Trump, in classic disinformation mode, blatantly misrepresented (in pain language, lied) about job gains, boasting how GM was doing massive hiring thanks to him. In reality, GM is firing workers. Trump stated "Breaking news, General Motors announced that they're adding or keeping 900 jobs right here in Michigan and that's going to be over the next 12 months." 9 days earlier GM announced that it was laying off 1,100 workers in Michigan. The 900 sited by Trump are only those which can possibly recover work at some point in the future, though in reality the best than can be expected is 680. Even if it happens, 420 workers still lose their jobs. Further, if the 680 can get work, they'll be unemployed for a substantial period first. Trumpmath.
7
There may be reason for optimism in some places, despite the uncertainty that comes from Trump's wavering on things like trade agreements and his overall weakness. But if there is growth, the big question, politically, is where that growth takes place.
If blue states already have stronger economies than red states, why would growth accelerate more in red states than blue states? Unless oil prices increase significantly, a state like Texas won't see many gains, and if Trump renegotiates NAFTA in a more protectionist direction the state's economy could take a big hit.
Meanwhile, there's no reason manufacturing jobs will necessarily return to places like Flint or Youngstown, with their crumbling infrastructure and poor education systems. And tax breaks for industry are more likely to either end up in the pockets of the shareholders or funding more automation than increasing employment.
Republicans may have reason for optimism, but the fact remains that most business decisions are ultimately made for business reasons, not politics. Business leaders may include political calculations in their decision-making, but ultimately their goal is to get the biggest net revenue gain. If conditions have been better in blue states than red states, then it's the blue states that will benefit from their optimism. Then all that's left for the red states is resentment. Republicans used the politics of resentment to win in 2016, but that can carry them only so far.
If blue states already have stronger economies than red states, why would growth accelerate more in red states than blue states? Unless oil prices increase significantly, a state like Texas won't see many gains, and if Trump renegotiates NAFTA in a more protectionist direction the state's economy could take a big hit.
Meanwhile, there's no reason manufacturing jobs will necessarily return to places like Flint or Youngstown, with their crumbling infrastructure and poor education systems. And tax breaks for industry are more likely to either end up in the pockets of the shareholders or funding more automation than increasing employment.
Republicans may have reason for optimism, but the fact remains that most business decisions are ultimately made for business reasons, not politics. Business leaders may include political calculations in their decision-making, but ultimately their goal is to get the biggest net revenue gain. If conditions have been better in blue states than red states, then it's the blue states that will benefit from their optimism. Then all that's left for the red states is resentment. Republicans used the politics of resentment to win in 2016, but that can carry them only so far.
11
If this were an airplane, I would deplane immediately. The pilot is stark raving mad.
16
If you didn't have a parachute, it would just be suicide.
3
We're still on the ground. Wait until Trump installs 124 God's little pet goldfish into the inventory of vacant judicial slots McConnell has set aside to fill now.
3
The results of the Michigan survey are not that surprising if you look at the revolution in economic theory that has taken place in the past 20 years. "Traditional" rational expectations theory has been overturned by behavioral economics. We now realize that consumers are hardly rational (in the mathematical sense) in their economic decision-making but that they are far more emotional-- that they operationalize their beliefs rather than any careful consideration of factual, empirical data. This has been apparent for some time now, and clearly helps explain the outcome of the Presidential election last November. As one prominent politician might say, "sad"-- indeed, extremely sad for all of America and its future economic well-being.
2
I don't believe that the Republican party is only interested in money flowing to the few. In fact they are concerned about small businesses and about some of the onerous regulations that choke their growth. I have two sons who are small business owners. One has been stymied by the 41% increase in premium rates for health care that his business provides his employees as well as the well- intentioned but far too complex regulations surrounding recent new fiduciary guidelines for all retirement plan accounts. The other son has seen his employee costs increase perhaps unaffordably due to overtime pay regulations applicable to young employees in jobs that are inherently flexible in terms of work hour requirements. Again, this is putting unnecessary strain on a growing but marginally profitable business. Government is putting a stranglehold on small businesses through well meaning objectives whose regulations are painfully too complex and lack essential pragmatism.
3
Trump's moves on regulation are promising. In fact, it's promising just to have someone in the White House again who understands how to run a business. Obama produced so many new regulations, it was clear he was oblivious to both cost and burden. Obamacare was a heavy burden that Obama dealt with (or didn't) by ignoring all but the newly insured.
4
It is interesting that Colorado, not a Trump state, has a very restrictive tax policy (Taxpayers Bill of Rights) which is largely credited for Colorado's quick rebound but is DESPISED by Colorado Democrats, and LOVED by Colorado Republicans
3
All anyone has to do is look at the widening income/wealth divide and ask themselves if they have the same opportunities and lifestyle their parents had and will their children have the same opportunities and lifestyle they have.
After that, if they still believe the voodoo economics of the Republicans and the Wall Street owned moderate Democrats, then they deserve what they get
After that, if they still believe the voodoo economics of the Republicans and the Wall Street owned moderate Democrats, then they deserve what they get
4
It's a familiar cycle that started with Nixon. To prevent a major recession oN his watch, Nixon imposed price ceilings on gas and a few other things. Price ceilings are, of course, not sustainable. Carter came along, cleaned things up, removed the ceilings, and was blamed for the recession that should have started under Nixon.
Ever since then we have been in a pattern where a Republican president screws up the budget, throws us into unsustainable debt. So we elect a Democrat to clean up, then name him for the fallout, and elect another Republican who lowers taxes and starts unfounded wars, and it goes round and round.
So, now we are in the part where we lower taxes and start wars. This time the government is also declaring war on poor US citizens. I wonder how this will ever end.
Ever since then we have been in a pattern where a Republican president screws up the budget, throws us into unsustainable debt. So we elect a Democrat to clean up, then name him for the fallout, and elect another Republican who lowers taxes and starts unfounded wars, and it goes round and round.
So, now we are in the part where we lower taxes and start wars. This time the government is also declaring war on poor US citizens. I wonder how this will ever end.
6
Perhaps the irrational exuberance of those who support Trump will be balanced by the irrational gloom of those who don't, but the question is not who is more irrational but who has the money to spend in or withhold from the "Economy". No matter who may hold the most useful view of our current economic prospects, uncertainty has rarely been a positive stimulus to spending. If even a small portion of the Trump boosters come off their high and are disillusioned, a very large hole will open and a downward spiral will be a very real threat.
3
A fact not mentioned here is the misinformation campaign waged by right wing "news" organizations over the last eight years.
Republicans (at least a healthy percentage of them) thought that unemployment rose to over 20% under Obama. And that the stock market actually declined under Obama.
Of course there's a partisan divide.
Republicans (at least a healthy percentage of them) thought that unemployment rose to over 20% under Obama. And that the stock market actually declined under Obama.
Of course there's a partisan divide.
7
uh, there's an elephant in the room here that you are ignoring.
those happy, upbeat, optimistic people on the right, in disproportionate numbers, don't "believe' in climate change, they don't "believe" in evolution, despite what you refer to as 'objective reality.'
I wonder how the trumpsters feel about gravity. After all, that's "only a theory, " too.
When fully half of the electorate has joined hands and jumped off the deep end of the pool, you shouldn't be surprised at anything that comes out of their mouths.
those happy, upbeat, optimistic people on the right, in disproportionate numbers, don't "believe' in climate change, they don't "believe" in evolution, despite what you refer to as 'objective reality.'
I wonder how the trumpsters feel about gravity. After all, that's "only a theory, " too.
When fully half of the electorate has joined hands and jumped off the deep end of the pool, you shouldn't be surprised at anything that comes out of their mouths.
6
Republicans probably think the economy does better under Republican presidents. Democrat know that (in the real world) it does worse.
8
Have you ever heard of Ronald Reagan?
1
Republicans see white male at the helm, God given natural order restored, soon abortion will be outlawed, everything must be good. Democrats see erratic, narcissist in the White House planning to make life more difficult for the majority of Americans and engage in wasteful spending, things don't look good.
5
If I were a big business owner like Mr. Congdon, CEO of Old Dominion Freight Line, I'd be bullish, too: Lower corporate taxes, huge increase in business valuation, etc. If I were one of the drivers newly-employed by Mr. Congdon's company, though, I'd be rather fearful unless the CEO has made it a clear policy that business growth will be shared amongst all employees. Don't bank on it.
9
This analysis suggests that consumer spending is a good thing. It is not. If this nation does not begin to reign in its wasteful consumption and begin to adapt a more basic, simple and resource sharing style of life, the physical and social ecology of this planet will continue to implode, at least regarding the rapacious and destructive species we call homo sapiens - sic.
4
How tracking the rate of the number of people not having one full time job that provides a living wage?
3
The reason for rising optimism coexisting with increased uncertainty is those who are optimistic 1) believe Trump's promises even though 2) these would actually undermine the economy. The Republicans who are optimistic are ignoring the details. Tax cuts will increase deficit and debt, which they ignore, while assuming he will bring back millions of jobs to Republican states, which isn't going to happen because the manufacturing jobs that are gone are staying gone while robotics is only going to take more jobs from those with only a high school education...or less. Trade/tariff wars would cost many jobs, including those held by working-class voters who support Trump. Optimism meets ignorance of reality.
Eclectic Pragmatism — http://eclectic-pragmatist.tumblr.com/
Eclectic Pragmatist — https://medium.com/eclectic-pragmatism
Eclectic Pragmatism — http://eclectic-pragmatist.tumblr.com/
Eclectic Pragmatist — https://medium.com/eclectic-pragmatism
4
Since 2000 white Americans have uniquely and surprisingly seen their life expectancy decrease beneath increasing alcoholism, drug addiction, depression and suicide. While the white birthrate has declined below replacement level with the only whites still having babies coming from the very bottom of the socioeconomic educational pyramid. Nearly 80% of suicides in America are white men.
Despite 57% and 59% of white voters going with McCain/Palin and Romney/Ryan in 2008 and 2012, Barack Obama won two terms as POTUS with popular and electoral majorities. While the 46% of Americans who voted for Trump in 2016 included 58% of white voters with the support of 63% of white men and 54% of white women Trump managed to claim a thin Electoral College majority. Trump is the candidate of white despair.
Economics is no more a science than are politics, finance, accounting, law and history. There are way too many variables and unknowns to craft any reasonable double blind repeatable testable consistent controls. Economics is gender, "race", color, ethnicity, faith, national origin, history, education, politics and arithmetic. Not all consumers nor economists nor colored Americans are created equal.
Despite 57% and 59% of white voters going with McCain/Palin and Romney/Ryan in 2008 and 2012, Barack Obama won two terms as POTUS with popular and electoral majorities. While the 46% of Americans who voted for Trump in 2016 included 58% of white voters with the support of 63% of white men and 54% of white women Trump managed to claim a thin Electoral College majority. Trump is the candidate of white despair.
Economics is no more a science than are politics, finance, accounting, law and history. There are way too many variables and unknowns to craft any reasonable double blind repeatable testable consistent controls. Economics is gender, "race", color, ethnicity, faith, national origin, history, education, politics and arithmetic. Not all consumers nor economists nor colored Americans are created equal.
16
The enablement of Trump does not give confidence in the future to thoughtful people.
5
Consistency is white voters for GOP in past three elections for president: 57%, 59%, 58%. That cake is baked topped with white frosting. It's a case of these voters feeling America is changing too fast, while too much of hard-earned white people's money is going to undeserving people of darker skin. The irony is that it's the poor portion of this while block is hurting badly and the Trump Team has no plans to help them.
5
"Mr. Summers is nonetheless slightly more optimistic than he was late last year, because the data on housing starts and business investment intentions has been positive, not because of the new administration’s policies."
Mr. Summers, business investment intentions are impacted by expectations of positive changes in the tax and regulatory environment as you well know.
Mr. Summers, business investment intentions are impacted by expectations of positive changes in the tax and regulatory environment as you well know.
3
The costs of feeding a family are out of control. Many must survive on unhealthy diets. Congress is willing to make us choose between health care and starvation. Quite a "boom" GOP.
9
The demagoguery Trump employed under the tutelage of Steve "Fourth Turning" Bannon painted an America on the verge of collapse -- there was no where to go but up in the eyes of Trump voters since he conned that he alone could save America from all the phantom "Carnage" at home and "losing" abroad.
Had Hillary won, they would have been pulling their hair out -- even though the first few months of economic reports would have provided virtually the same positive outlook regardless of who won.
What we see with Trump and Bannon is a desire to tear everything down and start over (just look at his Cabinet), but since they don't actually know how to build anything (not even a wall) they put all of our resources into our long world-dominant military.
Trump isn't a threat to the economy specifically, but all the good that America has stood for. In his hands, we will fall behind in innovation for the sake of indulging the fears he has mythologized, like protecting us from Sharia Law. These are short-sighted rulers.
Had Hillary won, they would have been pulling their hair out -- even though the first few months of economic reports would have provided virtually the same positive outlook regardless of who won.
What we see with Trump and Bannon is a desire to tear everything down and start over (just look at his Cabinet), but since they don't actually know how to build anything (not even a wall) they put all of our resources into our long world-dominant military.
Trump isn't a threat to the economy specifically, but all the good that America has stood for. In his hands, we will fall behind in innovation for the sake of indulging the fears he has mythologized, like protecting us from Sharia Law. These are short-sighted rulers.
14
Trump voters drank the Koolaid BEFORE they voted. Not a wonder the after-effects include excessive optimism. But reality will set in eventually, and what a hangover!
9
If it is truly quantifiable, the phenomena will be bore out by the numbers. But that is a big if.
1
Republicans believe a boom is at hand...based on guy feelings, manhood pride, and a very short and convenient memory.
Democrats see an imminent recession based on research, facts, history and the ability to admit when data supports something you would rather not believe.
Democrats see an imminent recession based on research, facts, history and the ability to admit when data supports something you would rather not believe.
20
So according to this, Republican leaning states are still feeling the recession, and states that voted for Democrats are experiencing a vigorous economy and yet, voters in Republican states continue to vote for Republican candidates and blame Democrats for their economic woes...just saying
It is not that strange that people that live in completely separated universes and see everything differently have different views of the economy.
Especially because at this point in time nothing has really happened to impact people in one way or another, so we are really not talking about the economy, we are talking about the perception of the economy as viewed from these different universes.
The only people that might have an actual different economic outlook are the very few that invest in the stock market, got a new job or lost a job.
Especially because at this point in time nothing has really happened to impact people in one way or another, so we are really not talking about the economy, we are talking about the perception of the economy as viewed from these different universes.
The only people that might have an actual different economic outlook are the very few that invest in the stock market, got a new job or lost a job.
4
Sometimes past performance does predict future results. Over the last 30 years we have seem major bubbles and bursts in the economy as a result of Republican administration policies (remember 2008?) and recovery during Democratic administrations. Repeatedly Republicans have given free rein to the foxes and put them in charge of the hen house, with predictable results. Now we have a stock market flying high on absolutely no evidence, with a president who believes in running up debt and then defaulting, and a Republican party which wants to destroy all limitations on businesses with the thoroughly debunked idea that trickle down economics works. If you want to see evidence of why the Republican approach to economics doesn't work look at Kansas. If you want to see why Democrats believe in their approach to the economy, look at California. This divide in views of the effect of a Republican administration on the economy is based in fact, not political leaning.
24
The economy is the least of my worries. The real question is whether we will survive the next four years. The odds of a catastrophic war are so much higher now.
17
Supply side economics has proven itself to be a bad theory again and again. It has never worked. The Republicans in Kansas just had to raise taxes to pay for Brownback's disastrous supply side experiment. Supply side economics is a lie designed as an argument for tax cuts for the rich. And itsa lie that most Republicans, and even many centrist Democrats are unwilling to give up. So because they have to expect Trump to cut taxes, they have to believe it will fix the economy.
They want to cut corporate taxes, so that corporations will invest. First off, corporations don't expand output, unless they expect demand to increase, so that doesn't really work, because cutting corporate tax rates doesn't increase demand.
Second, when you do manage to increase corporate investment, they are investing in machines. These days machines means robots and artificial intelligence. Robots and artificial intelligence replaces far more jobs then they create. Maybe the increased efficiency creates more profit, but with that profit concentrated in the owners of the robots, it does not create demand for goods and services. It creates a demand for places to put horded cash. This results in cash moving from asset bubble to asset bubble, or into the world derivatives casino. This creates instability not demand.
If we tax the obscene profits taken by manipulating markets of every kind, and invest them in humans and infrastructure (especially green infrastructure) we can grow demand and efficiency.
They want to cut corporate taxes, so that corporations will invest. First off, corporations don't expand output, unless they expect demand to increase, so that doesn't really work, because cutting corporate tax rates doesn't increase demand.
Second, when you do manage to increase corporate investment, they are investing in machines. These days machines means robots and artificial intelligence. Robots and artificial intelligence replaces far more jobs then they create. Maybe the increased efficiency creates more profit, but with that profit concentrated in the owners of the robots, it does not create demand for goods and services. It creates a demand for places to put horded cash. This results in cash moving from asset bubble to asset bubble, or into the world derivatives casino. This creates instability not demand.
If we tax the obscene profits taken by manipulating markets of every kind, and invest them in humans and infrastructure (especially green infrastructure) we can grow demand and efficiency.
Economic indicators from the last month or last quarter - housing sales, fixed investments, inflation, change in employment, household spending, exports, etc. - may predict economic trends next month or next quarter probably only because they are unlikely to change quickly. But beyond the expectation of inertia, our ability to predict future economic performance is limited.
Hope is not an economic strategy. The exuberance of folks in rural areas may be unfounded. Rural areas never recovered when machines replaced farmers, ranchers, miners, lumberjacks, etc. Their children have been moving to the cities, so the rural population has been aging out and there isn't much of a workforce left. What is there is land that could be used more to generate wind power, solar energy, etc.
We now have an Administration and Congress that is defaulting control of the clean energy industry to China. How sad that conservative politicians are giving away a future for rural residents because the owners and investors in fossil fuels provide the campaign contributions and propaganda that elect them.
Some things could bust the economy in a matter of quarters - border tax, trade war, big expenditures on guns & butter, etc. Policies with longer lead times - unfunded tax giveaways to corporations and the rich, undoing financial protections, failure to invest in clean energy, may tank our economy in a matter of years.
Again, prediction is precarious but the tea leaves look more risky than not
Hope is not an economic strategy. The exuberance of folks in rural areas may be unfounded. Rural areas never recovered when machines replaced farmers, ranchers, miners, lumberjacks, etc. Their children have been moving to the cities, so the rural population has been aging out and there isn't much of a workforce left. What is there is land that could be used more to generate wind power, solar energy, etc.
We now have an Administration and Congress that is defaulting control of the clean energy industry to China. How sad that conservative politicians are giving away a future for rural residents because the owners and investors in fossil fuels provide the campaign contributions and propaganda that elect them.
Some things could bust the economy in a matter of quarters - border tax, trade war, big expenditures on guns & butter, etc. Policies with longer lead times - unfunded tax giveaways to corporations and the rich, undoing financial protections, failure to invest in clean energy, may tank our economy in a matter of years.
Again, prediction is precarious but the tea leaves look more risky than not
6
Trump was in many cases a molotov cocktail thrown by a desperate and ignored segment of Americans. Anything that seems to be an improvement for them is welcomed as a sign of hopefulness. For the ones who thought Trump was a "disaster" and for whom he seems to fulfilling that promise with Trumpcare, constant dishonesty, a chaotic WH and active and open profiteering in office--not to mention the Russian smoke that at this point obscures the WH from view, and a level of dishonesty from Congress also in refusing to perform their oversight of the Exec--we are all waiting for the economic shoe to drop. We are waiting to see if, after falsely accusing Obama of committing a felony, Trump will provoke a war for the same reason--to distract from the multiple Russian investigations.
6
This certainly makes for very interesting reading, but fifty years of investing in only the U.S. economy shows you that tbeing political is no way to make money. Who was President has made no difference in the results that were achieved - it's like the effect of a fly on an elephant. In addition, the all-powerful compounding of interest continues without regard to political persuasion. I am one who will not be making any change to my retirement portfolio just because the celebrity Donald has become our President. I made no adjustment for Reagan, and he claimed to be even more of an ideologue.
3
So what you are saying is that survey swings with the biggest liars, the bigger promises of riches (for who?), lying works on population at large and makes believers out of them. It is a green light for politicians to become flim flammers like Trump.
AND we have a corporate media that has all the facts of busts and booms and what caused them, and could out the lies. BUT corporate media is part of the elites who get richer by business who bring them big bucks for advertisement in print and TV.
This is a good poll for marketing, campaigns, strategists and flim flam men and women who want more deregulation at any cost and more profits and heck with air,water, safe drugs, food, products.
Red States will depend more on the blue states to cover their short falls.
AND we have a corporate media that has all the facts of busts and booms and what caused them, and could out the lies. BUT corporate media is part of the elites who get richer by business who bring them big bucks for advertisement in print and TV.
This is a good poll for marketing, campaigns, strategists and flim flam men and women who want more deregulation at any cost and more profits and heck with air,water, safe drugs, food, products.
Red States will depend more on the blue states to cover their short falls.
2
Both sides are likely to be disappointed in the end. However, Republicans will focus on destroying even more of the middle class and undermine their base of voters who aren't wealthy.
The ideology of republicans has been implemented in places like Kansas and formerly in California (before Jerry Brown) and the results were not good for the average voter.
California has turned away from reaganomics and to some extent so has Kansas but the economy of Kansas has a long way to go before recovering. Republicans have not learned the lesson.
As long as dark money and ideology rule the outlook isn't going to be good. Dr. Krugman predicted a collapse early after the election, then he walked it back saying he over-reacted but republican dogma and disconnect from reality combined with a distrust of Trump by leadership will eventually bring chaos.
It's likely that the economy is more robust than people think. It may take longer but a bust is coming even if it's just cyclical. And Trump will get blamed. The McConnells and Ryans will blame him as well. Their ideology will prevent them from working together right when they need it most. It is at this time that democrats should make sure the republicans are the reason for the recession (again).
The ideology of republicans has been implemented in places like Kansas and formerly in California (before Jerry Brown) and the results were not good for the average voter.
California has turned away from reaganomics and to some extent so has Kansas but the economy of Kansas has a long way to go before recovering. Republicans have not learned the lesson.
As long as dark money and ideology rule the outlook isn't going to be good. Dr. Krugman predicted a collapse early after the election, then he walked it back saying he over-reacted but republican dogma and disconnect from reality combined with a distrust of Trump by leadership will eventually bring chaos.
It's likely that the economy is more robust than people think. It may take longer but a bust is coming even if it's just cyclical. And Trump will get blamed. The McConnells and Ryans will blame him as well. Their ideology will prevent them from working together right when they need it most. It is at this time that democrats should make sure the republicans are the reason for the recession (again).
2
All economics are local, to paraphrase an old saw about politics.
Counties that supported Trump, representing 36% of GDP, might face massive outflows of Federal transfers like the Appalachian Regional Commission and Medicaid funds. They may see stagnation from a shortage of immigrant labor that has been sustaining agriculture, food processing and small town economies, while e-commerce will drain more from local retail business. Someday of course, climate change might make all of these problems look small, especially from the Gulf to the Southwest.
Clinton counties, where 64% of GDP already occurs, are buoyed by booming corporate profits from an expanding global economy. The Asian share of the global middle class will grow from 28% now to 66% by 2030, so those who work or invest in the global economy will gain. The exploding renewable energy economy will be an important source of high value employment.
Trump could disrupt global trade, which would damage US commodity exports, especially agricultural and energy. Walking away from trade agreements will cause relocation of manufacturing to free trade countries like Mexico, which is why Mexico is saying "bring it on" regarding renegotiation of NAFTA.
The "Trump Effect" on the overall US economy will be somewhere between negligible and negative, but the disparity in local economies will continue to grow to the degree that the GOP cooperates with the Trump agenda.
Counties that supported Trump, representing 36% of GDP, might face massive outflows of Federal transfers like the Appalachian Regional Commission and Medicaid funds. They may see stagnation from a shortage of immigrant labor that has been sustaining agriculture, food processing and small town economies, while e-commerce will drain more from local retail business. Someday of course, climate change might make all of these problems look small, especially from the Gulf to the Southwest.
Clinton counties, where 64% of GDP already occurs, are buoyed by booming corporate profits from an expanding global economy. The Asian share of the global middle class will grow from 28% now to 66% by 2030, so those who work or invest in the global economy will gain. The exploding renewable energy economy will be an important source of high value employment.
Trump could disrupt global trade, which would damage US commodity exports, especially agricultural and energy. Walking away from trade agreements will cause relocation of manufacturing to free trade countries like Mexico, which is why Mexico is saying "bring it on" regarding renegotiation of NAFTA.
The "Trump Effect" on the overall US economy will be somewhere between negligible and negative, but the disparity in local economies will continue to grow to the degree that the GOP cooperates with the Trump agenda.
8
Thanks NYT. Please continue the hard work outing companies who's management and ownership supported electing the president currently making a mockery of our constitution. I'll be sure to make a note never to do business with Old Dominion.
24
My wife, is interested in taking riding lessons. She did as a child and loved it. We are now interested in purchasing a horse. Long story short. At the intersection of Fern Lake Road and Route 7, in the southwest corner of that intersection is a small farm that advertises "Morgan horses for sale." We had talked with them last spring. Then in mid-August a Trump sign appeared at their intersection. I inquired about it. The person I spoke with denied that they placed it, that it was a neighbor, who asked permission, because of the visibility. Needless to say, I told them we will purchase our Morgan elsewhere.
1
"“I fell out of bed when I got up in the morning on Nov. 9,” he admitted. “I didn’t quite know what I was voting for.”
Really? Trump's campaign words were as explicit as the rising sun. What's worse? Not knowing or admitting not knowing?
Has the man NO embarrassment?
Really? Trump's campaign words were as explicit as the rising sun. What's worse? Not knowing or admitting not knowing?
Has the man NO embarrassment?
31
I'm a Trump zealot, and I think I remember Michigan's Mr Curtin, when I got a quantitative PhD there oh so many years ago.
About seven years ago I made a prediction about the Obama years, that he would seek to destroy the economy b/c he hated Amerikkka, and that in defense, and counter attack, interest rates would stay low, to facilitate capitalism (even if capitalism is sometimes defined as capital deployment, ie interest rates), and with low to zero rates, there would be an equities bubble, and I invested accordingly, and have beaten the indices by 20% each year.
I think, the Trump boom in equities, on spec, is another sign of bullishness and I am up another 20% in five months.
I think, Dems and Pubs, would argue about the color of the sky, - sunny or cloudy,- and whether the glass is half empty of half full.
I am 'impressed,' flabbered and gasted, about how the experts cited here, are primarily from the Obama administration, who see dire and devastation outcomes
That said, since, per this author, voters voted according to the economies of their States, I submit, that voters voted their issues and interests, and NOT the interests of the Russian hackers, if they existed, unless of course the pesky rooskies, were smart enough to target the disaffected US local voter, and as such smarter than those, um, self-same Obama advisors, whose expertise on domestic consumer projections, was presumably available to candidate Clinton et al
just saying
About seven years ago I made a prediction about the Obama years, that he would seek to destroy the economy b/c he hated Amerikkka, and that in defense, and counter attack, interest rates would stay low, to facilitate capitalism (even if capitalism is sometimes defined as capital deployment, ie interest rates), and with low to zero rates, there would be an equities bubble, and I invested accordingly, and have beaten the indices by 20% each year.
I think, the Trump boom in equities, on spec, is another sign of bullishness and I am up another 20% in five months.
I think, Dems and Pubs, would argue about the color of the sky, - sunny or cloudy,- and whether the glass is half empty of half full.
I am 'impressed,' flabbered and gasted, about how the experts cited here, are primarily from the Obama administration, who see dire and devastation outcomes
That said, since, per this author, voters voted according to the economies of their States, I submit, that voters voted their issues and interests, and NOT the interests of the Russian hackers, if they existed, unless of course the pesky rooskies, were smart enough to target the disaffected US local voter, and as such smarter than those, um, self-same Obama advisors, whose expertise on domestic consumer projections, was presumably available to candidate Clinton et al
just saying
6
Can't comprehend what your message is and maybe that's for the best?
2
You may have profited, but Obama didn't destroy the economy. That was Bush. Obama left the economy in far better shape than the one he inherited. BTW, stock market performance has little to do with the real economy. It is mostly legalized gambling.
3
You're wasting your time reading the NYTimes! I read the Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal, because I believe them to be "unbiased". But, then again, if you believe the Russians did no interference in the 2016 presidential campaign,...you are truly lost! I'm an independent,...the two party system keeps our system in check; neither party is totally inept and neither party is without sin!
2
I'd say that focus should be on historic low unemployment growth, not a temporary slow down of job creation numbers. Tha said, it is fascinating how polarized the views are on this. While democrats are claiming that "the Winter is coming", I will debate that more likely a combination of current results and planned Trump policies will make job creation numbers much stronger. We are looking at lagging economic indicators with job creation numbers, and it's more important to predict impact on these numbers by planned policies.
Therr is a debate on this topic at debateIsland debate site.
http://www.debateisland.com/discussion/677/boom-or-bust-stark-partisan-d...
Therr is a debate on this topic at debateIsland debate site.
http://www.debateisland.com/discussion/677/boom-or-bust-stark-partisan-d...
3
There couldn't be more of a stark difference between the Obama economic ideology and that of Mr. Trump. Mr. Obama hated America, abused small business with unnecessary regulation and enjoyed the world record high 35% tax rate on business. Mr. Trump loves America, is deregulating to help business and is trying to reduce the corporate tax rate so that businesses want to do business in the US.
8
What legislation did Obama sign or even tout that increased Taxes on Businesses?
That went through the House and Senate?
That went through the House and Senate?
3
Wow, what planet do you live on; Obama hated America? Is it not possible he is an imperfect human serving life the best way he knows how?
3
This explains why the US economy under Obama recovered so much more quickly than did Europe's, why unemployment when Obama left office was about half of what it was at its peak soon after he took office, why the stock market broke records during his term, why the annual federal budget deficit was cut more than half -- all because of Obama's hatred of America and his abuse of small businesses. I guess if that's what you believe, then he really was incompetent, since the US economy improved so much under his watch!
7
A massive education program affordable to everyone is the only solution to growth and future employment. While Bernie Sanders suggested free tuition I feel a graduated system of tuition is more feasible. In my day Jr. College was only $6 a semester. 10 years later it was $50 a semester. Now it's $300-$400 a unit per semester. State colleges were a few hundred dollars a semester, now they are several thousand. Private institutions like University of Southern California were $500 a semester. Now $50,000 to $60,000 a year. It's all too much for the majority of the population.
By instituting a massive program for young and old we become an attractive educated resource for international companies. New innovations will no longer wait for the workforce to catch up. We will again be leaders of the world and our growth and wealth will grow exponentially. Right now we are heading the wrong way with proposed budget cuts, decomposing secondary education, continued skyrocketing tuitions with little financial support, and cutting out retraining programs in newer technologies. It has to stop or we will become a third world country sooner than you think. I call the current proposed Trump program "The Dumbing Down of America".
By instituting a massive program for young and old we become an attractive educated resource for international companies. New innovations will no longer wait for the workforce to catch up. We will again be leaders of the world and our growth and wealth will grow exponentially. Right now we are heading the wrong way with proposed budget cuts, decomposing secondary education, continued skyrocketing tuitions with little financial support, and cutting out retraining programs in newer technologies. It has to stop or we will become a third world country sooner than you think. I call the current proposed Trump program "The Dumbing Down of America".
13
David Congdon says, “I didn’t quite know what I was voting for.” That can't be true, can it? Is lining his own pocket all he cares about? Trump didn't exactly hide his racism, his misogyny, his vulgarity, and his incitements to violence against those who disagreed with him. If you voted for Trump, that's what you voted for.
30
Greetings Mr. Bubble.
1
The wallet gazers are pleased as punch. It doesn't matter how their money is made or who might get hurt.
Their world is reduced to their needs only. Don't mention problems like environment or their children's future. They don't want to know.
It's easier than ever to look in the mirror, and not see a moral monster.
Their world is reduced to their needs only. Don't mention problems like environment or their children's future. They don't want to know.
It's easier than ever to look in the mirror, and not see a moral monster.
11
Just another example of citizen ignorance. As if we needed another example.
8
Wonderful news NYT. Keep telling your readers what they want to hear.
1
Sometimes when you run a divisive campaign, a history of lawsuits, bankruptcies, denigrating practically every demo on the planet,..you get Blow Back.
Sometimes.
Sometimes.
2
Is the economy in a sluggish state that much worse than it's been historically? How many of these pessimists kids have i phones for instance?There seems to be a sizable amount of people in these areas that feel entitled, and be handed jobs magically without retraining and education to progress with the new economy. Instead the skills of a coal miner are promoted as advancing our society, even glorified. This is all that is needed to revitalize the US economy and therefore feel free to strip education funding as well. Conservative politicians love this. Its a cycle of self sympathy that excuses them from taking more responsibility and feeling angry, accepting more and more aggressive and rude banter as acceptable. The politicians in these regions are handily playing this up to get votes, all the while playing a game of smoke and mirrors with lobbyists and enriching themselves. The self pity and ignorance also seem to be an underlying theme of the "opioid crisis" which also is enriching pharmaceuticals and politicians, and hitting these sluggish places hardest. Just like the policy in Syria, Trump's economic policy is bound to change on a knee jerk dime. The people on the stock market floor will react, and the real work of maintaining a healthy economy will be underfunded and ignored.
All that's lacking in the photo is a waving American flag blessing this man's "optimism." A smiling pharaoh.
2
The age of wishful thinking, coupled with racism and xenophobia.
11
Will Trump be able to sustain the Obama economic, job and wage growth? Probably not.
7
Public polls over the last couple years seem to be affected by partisan sandbagging (tactical misrepresentation). This impression should be checked by comparing poll responses to actions. Once it's confirmed, pollsters will need to find a way to correct for it.
But in general society has lost an asset when we can't count on a person's expressed views connecting to the person's internal understandings.
But in general society has lost an asset when we can't count on a person's expressed views connecting to the person's internal understandings.
3
Thanks for the news that if 1/3 of the population were to cut consumer spending by 5% you get a recession -- I've cut my consumer spending to as close to 100% as I can get, and I started at none 20 January 2017.
3
It is critically necessary that we resume large-scale public spending on infrastructure. Republicans must accept the need for increased taxes to pay for it; Democrats must resist an understandable urge to punish McConnell and Trump. If we let the common good collapse we'll be left with technological feudalism.
4
Nobody knows how the economy will turn out...
Having said that, the only thing one can look at is what happens when a demagogue is in office like Trump.
Whether it was Alcibedes, the first one in classical Greece or the last one Chavez in Venz., it usually does not turn out well for one's economy.
Having said that, the only thing one can look at is what happens when a demagogue is in office like Trump.
Whether it was Alcibedes, the first one in classical Greece or the last one Chavez in Venz., it usually does not turn out well for one's economy.
8
In a totally unscientific poll of this one Bernie Sanders supporter who voted for HRC (while holding my nose), I see the economy continuing in the present modestly improving direction for basically all of 2017, followed by a decline induced by Republican budget cuts in both the Federal and many state governments beginning in the Fiscal 2018 year, which begins on October 1.
The legislative incompetence of the Republicans will not make people feel comforted. These fools are demonstrating again and again that they are incapable of proposing a rational set of legislative actions, and even less competent in actually getting their proposals passed into law. When it becomes apparent that NOBODY is running things, the wheels will fall off.
The legislative incompetence of the Republicans will not make people feel comforted. These fools are demonstrating again and again that they are incapable of proposing a rational set of legislative actions, and even less competent in actually getting their proposals passed into law. When it becomes apparent that NOBODY is running things, the wheels will fall off.
5
The metric discussed is "consumer sentiment" which is very subjective so not sure why it's surprising that there is a partisan divide. What would be more troubling is if for a "hard statistic" like unemployment rate, Republicans didn't trust it when Obama was president and now do with Trump, and Democrats vice-versa.
4
Smoke and Mirrors. Tricked down is as broken of a concept as our democracy.
2
If the federal government spends less money in the US, especially money for the bottom half of consumers, the economy will go into recession. If the Feds spend lots of money on the military and foreign adventures, that will lead to minimal job creation and take it from the true economy. Thinking savings will not allow the lower half to borrow is a pipe dream.
2
It's not all that surprising to see such disparity in people's views. Much of what we read is opinion, not fact. The glass of water is half full vs half empty, yet the fact is that the amount of water is the same.
2
I'd like to know how a Corporate Kleptocracy, which is our current type of government, is expected to create an economic boom for all, not just for themselves. In fact, the Trump family is already racking in greenbacks from all sides!
3
Leave it to the Republicans to take up tax "reform" right at the April 15 tax deadline, exactly when we are most likely to make rational tax decisions.
5
No worries Richard, just make an extra donation to the IRS if you are so thoroughly convinced that you are going to be undertaxed under a new plan.
1
The date has nothing to do with interfering with "rational" GOP thinking, unless it is Jan. 1981.
1
These idiots may not even come up with a continuing resolution to fund the government past April 28.
The facts not mentioned in the article or the top reader's picks in the comments are 1. baby boomers are retiring, down sizing and belt tightening and 2. the millenials are being held back by student loan debt, low income and limited job prospects. These trends and the trends of more unrest in the world and more environmental damage in the future will act as drags on the economy. So, don't get swept up in the bubble of self-delusion and unrealistic optimism. The future is ok for me personally, but the nation (and the world for that matter), not so good.
20
Very telling points that echo in my life, My kids don't have the prospects we had, both because of huge loan debt and real wage decline. My wife and I on the other hand have actual pensions we are now receiving and are in good shape but much of the discretionary income goes to prop up the kids in one form or the other. Not a growth economy.
5
Good luck with this president who considers golf and gambling economic product.
1
The split should not be looked at in terms of Republicans or Democrats, pessimists or optimists, but in terms of haves and have-nots. The economy is going to get better for those that are working at good, well paying jobs, who have some sort of financial stability and those who are working (or not) at low-paying, minimum wage-type jobs with few marketable skills to improve their lives.
9
It is proxy season in the boardroom right now. I have not read an annual report yet that does not boast of cost reductions and labor savings.
Investors should be very wary of the consequences of further wealth concentration. Stock buybacks concentrate even more power at the top of the income spectrum.
Investors should be very wary of the consequences of further wealth concentration. Stock buybacks concentrate even more power at the top of the income spectrum.
2
Seems like a lot of people are projecting emotion rather than reason. Barring some unforeseen circumstance perhaps the economy will grow modestly, though it will mostly benefit the wealthy which has been the case for the last 40 years.
However, given President Trump lack of predictability that doesn't bode well for the market place that values predictability.
However, given President Trump lack of predictability that doesn't bode well for the market place that values predictability.
6
As usual, the American public is woefully forgetful. Despite all of barbs Trump threw at Obama, all of the positive news since the election was all Obama, all the time. NOW, as the Trump team becomes more responsible, we are seeing less and less positive news. Let's see if he will also blame Obama for his mistakes while taking credit for anything good left over.
7
My parents, both New Yorkers, were graduated from college and entered the job market during the depression. They lived successful and prosperous lives, but the wolf was always not far from the door. Discretionary spending was always difficult and, except for a home mortgage, I don't think they ever took on any debt. We have just come through a painful recession. Perhaps a similar factor is dampening the expectations of our more educated young today.
4
What is the one constant in economics---certainty. What is the one constant in the Trump administration---uncertainty --- that is all you have to know about our future economic situation.
7
The split in beliefs about the future of the American economy is interesting but will have, at best, secondary effects. Since 2009 the American economy has been in a low-growth, stable equilibrium with millions of willing workers who have dropped out of the labor market. Unless the government undertakes a large Keynesian stimulus financed by borrowing to promote consumer demand and therefore business investment in plant and R&D, the economy will continue to stagnate,
As Heather Boushey observes, the incompetent Trump Administration is unlikely to carry that through. It is a dysfunctional popular front.
As Heather Boushey observes, the incompetent Trump Administration is unlikely to carry that through. It is a dysfunctional popular front.
2
I'm ready for a Great Depression that will make the Great Recession look like a cake walk. The longer Trump and the Republicans remain "in control" and chaos theory runs rampant through the fingers of Steve Bannon, the more quickly it will arrive. We may already be in a "recession" -- we all know (1) the government fudges numbers (2) they are always behind a month or two regarding what is REALLY happening in the economy. Amazon adding thousands of part-time jobs isn't going to cut it for helping suffering families in my home town. Thank God I'm retired and have sufficient to survive upon.
5
The problem lies in the definitions of terms -- as all our elected lawyers should know. They derive their opinions from the monthly Bureau of Labor Statistics report, a voluminous, multi-part tome based on the results of a random survey of less than 1% of the population.
This report's definition of "employed full time" is: the person taking the survey worked at least 1 hour during the week preceding the survey. This definition is how the U.S. derives its unemployment statistic of 4.5%.
Any urban planner knows that about 5% of a given U.S. population is always unemployed, due to mental health issues, addictions, illness, jail, etc. In fact, about 10% of the population is unemployed, including the 5% just mentioned. Those who have quit looking, and part-time workers, can be added to this statistic.
In times of uncertainty, which the current administration has brought to the table, with its radical removal of former Administration reforms, and a President who is an uncertain leader, individuals and corporations hang on to their money, to wait and see what the future brings.
They stop spending, job development, innovation and investment. Jobs for the Rust Belt are not yet in the works, nor is educational retraining for new techologies.
Politics and uncertainty aside, the definitions within the electeds' source material, the Bureau of Labor Statistics Report, must be changed because they are inaccurate. Congress cannot make good decisions based on bad infomation.
This report's definition of "employed full time" is: the person taking the survey worked at least 1 hour during the week preceding the survey. This definition is how the U.S. derives its unemployment statistic of 4.5%.
Any urban planner knows that about 5% of a given U.S. population is always unemployed, due to mental health issues, addictions, illness, jail, etc. In fact, about 10% of the population is unemployed, including the 5% just mentioned. Those who have quit looking, and part-time workers, can be added to this statistic.
In times of uncertainty, which the current administration has brought to the table, with its radical removal of former Administration reforms, and a President who is an uncertain leader, individuals and corporations hang on to their money, to wait and see what the future brings.
They stop spending, job development, innovation and investment. Jobs for the Rust Belt are not yet in the works, nor is educational retraining for new techologies.
Politics and uncertainty aside, the definitions within the electeds' source material, the Bureau of Labor Statistics Report, must be changed because they are inaccurate. Congress cannot make good decisions based on bad infomation.
1
If you had read the BLS report, you would know that there are six categories of Unemployment released every month. They are U-1 through U-6. U-3 is the "unofficial" unemployment rate. U-6 is the rate to which you refer in your comment.
Corporations stopped spending long before Trump. That's why they are content to let $2.6 Trillion in exorbitant profits languish in off-shore accounts to avoid paying US taxes.
Corporations stopped spending long before Trump. That's why they are content to let $2.6 Trillion in exorbitant profits languish in off-shore accounts to avoid paying US taxes.
2
@GLC--truly happy SOMEONE reads that report besides me. Since 2008, liquidity has accumulated with slow jobs creation, A Republican Congress controlled in the current and preceding administrations. Evidently, those who can keep their money offshore are content to let it accumulate interest, and are not motivated to create jobs, education for new technologies, invest in up-and-coming businesses. Despite the very wealthy 1%, the rest of the country's disposable income has gone down, or remained flat, since the crisis. This creates uncertainty about the future, and everyone, not just the very rich, hangs on to ther money.
1
There is no way having a lying, unprincipled and uninformed president is going to be go0d for the economy. And when the wasteful military spending and border wall costs are coupled with the billions of dollars removed from the economy by the deportation of several million undocumented workers, there is a chance we will have a recession. But Trumpetts can continue to wear their T-shirts and hats and live in denial, just as they do concerning such other things as racism, climate change, and tRump's mental stability.
8
We have to start measuring our well-being as a society a little bit more thoughtfully. Jobs and income matter, of course, but with a labor participation rate of slightly more than 60%, that's not all there is to it. Our well-being as a nation depends on a lot more than the quantity of consumption. What exactly are we consuming and why? What is the meaning and purpose of our work? Should we really be making and trucking around more stuff of any kind? Is any increase in GDP necessarily "good" for us all? At this point in our development as a society, we can afford a bit more sophistication in our thoughts about our progress and our future. The Social Progress Index provides some helpful information and comparisons: http://www.socialprogressimperative.org/social-progress-indexes/
3
Congratulations to the author of this short and sweet economic report. It raises real facts for economists, consumers, business and policy makers.
Since the 2009 financial crisis, economists are revising fundamental tenets of models of a modern economy. For example, the challenge to incorporate consumer and business behavior into econometric models.
After reading this piece I came to the following conclusion.
Either my fellow theoretic colleagues find out how to incorporate human behavior into economic models or students of economics will continue to be taught outdated theoretical models, worthless to be applied in a modern economy.
If that happens, public trust into economic forecast will continue to decline. Eventually, a new class of unemployed professionals could be created.
Since the 2009 financial crisis, economists are revising fundamental tenets of models of a modern economy. For example, the challenge to incorporate consumer and business behavior into econometric models.
After reading this piece I came to the following conclusion.
Either my fellow theoretic colleagues find out how to incorporate human behavior into economic models or students of economics will continue to be taught outdated theoretical models, worthless to be applied in a modern economy.
If that happens, public trust into economic forecast will continue to decline. Eventually, a new class of unemployed professionals could be created.
2
The economy might be completely the same but the perception vary based on the country leadership. Under the democratic, more resources are spent on social programs, thus, the beneficiaries of those are optimistic and are more likely to see the economy as great say, while others who believe are overtaxed to pay for those programs, won't. And vice versa, under the republican direction. The expectation is that the social programs will be cut so the recipients of those are dispirited and their view is gloomy while others believe they will be taxed less and retain more of their money.
Hence the divide
Hence the divide
21
It's interesting to observe in the various points of view paraded in this article, how different people pick the same facts in a selective way to fit their own point view.
11
It's no different than what so-called "Christians" do with their Bible, and so-called "Muslims" do with the Koran.
1
"paraded in this article"
You miss the point. Facts don't matter for certain people, but NOT all people.
You miss the point. Facts don't matter for certain people, but NOT all people.
1
Yes, and they believe it's everyone else who does it. They have no idea how obvious it all is.
3
"Economics has a foundation in hard numbers — employment, inflation, spending — that has largely allowed it to sidestep the competing partisan narratives that have afflicted American politics and culture."
How can journalists (for the NYT, no less)--remain so ignorant about
the concept of "hard numbers" from economics. Every economic statistic reported by the government or private research organizations includes multiple subjective issues (e.g., try to objectively compare an IBM Selectric to
Microsoft word). Every concept is subject to questions of data, methodology, sampling, operational definition, revision, semantics, longitudinal variation in underlying concepts (e.g., when comparing household incomes over time, you must understand that much income variation occurs because HH composition and demographics change.) All social "science" statistics whether from survey, compulsory reporting, or byproduct are a mess of assumptions,
definitions, statistical techniques, and a myriad of other "open to judgement and debate" issues.
In economics and other Social Science--HARD numbers do not exist. Never have, never will.
How can journalists (for the NYT, no less)--remain so ignorant about
the concept of "hard numbers" from economics. Every economic statistic reported by the government or private research organizations includes multiple subjective issues (e.g., try to objectively compare an IBM Selectric to
Microsoft word). Every concept is subject to questions of data, methodology, sampling, operational definition, revision, semantics, longitudinal variation in underlying concepts (e.g., when comparing household incomes over time, you must understand that much income variation occurs because HH composition and demographics change.) All social "science" statistics whether from survey, compulsory reporting, or byproduct are a mess of assumptions,
definitions, statistical techniques, and a myriad of other "open to judgement and debate" issues.
In economics and other Social Science--HARD numbers do not exist. Never have, never will.
12
As a retired sociologist I always enjoy discussions with economists who insistently ASSUME they deal in objective facts while I dealt only with subjective opinions. To which I query, is that concept you call "unemployment" an objective number, or one so filled with subjective choice of how to define who really is and who really isn't employed or underemployed? Ask Dems & Repubs the same question and you find people choose what "numbers" are real and which are fake. All humans are subjective and all academic disciplines are subject to choice of what to call objective. Only ideology and the ideologically blind argue to the contrary.
3
Yes, hard numbers in economics are rare, especially at the macro level.
But we can still see trends and see that certain policies tend to work, and other policies tend to fail. A lot of people go around claiming that economics is a meaningless social science in one sentence, then making economic pronouncements in the next. They are making a hypocritical argument in favor of their economic theory. (I don't know if this is what Jerry Professor does.) If you do not believe in economics, stay out of economic arguments.
The argument that government should stay out of economics is an economic theory.
The trend over the last 35 years to pretend to take government out of economics, by slashing in safety nets, and government investment in humans and infrastructure, while letting global corporations rely on government for military protection, subsidies, bail outs, and cheap resources has allowed the world economy to be dominated by fraction of 1% of the world population. It has centralized, not decentralized the economy, and centralized political power as well.
Government, under modern political theory, is supposed to be representative of, and responsive to the democratic wishes of the People, the sovereign citizens who lend their power to representatives. Supply side economics is an end run around this theory, trying convince the people that throwing money at the rich, instead of their children's education, healthcare, and infrastructure will make us better off.
Spread the power.
But we can still see trends and see that certain policies tend to work, and other policies tend to fail. A lot of people go around claiming that economics is a meaningless social science in one sentence, then making economic pronouncements in the next. They are making a hypocritical argument in favor of their economic theory. (I don't know if this is what Jerry Professor does.) If you do not believe in economics, stay out of economic arguments.
The argument that government should stay out of economics is an economic theory.
The trend over the last 35 years to pretend to take government out of economics, by slashing in safety nets, and government investment in humans and infrastructure, while letting global corporations rely on government for military protection, subsidies, bail outs, and cheap resources has allowed the world economy to be dominated by fraction of 1% of the world population. It has centralized, not decentralized the economy, and centralized political power as well.
Government, under modern political theory, is supposed to be representative of, and responsive to the democratic wishes of the People, the sovereign citizens who lend their power to representatives. Supply side economics is an end run around this theory, trying convince the people that throwing money at the rich, instead of their children's education, healthcare, and infrastructure will make us better off.
Spread the power.
1
Economics is not a science. If it were we would have 100 % employment all the time and wouldn't have these roller coaster cycles of boom and bust. The GOP and other Obama haters say, "This is the slowest recovery in history. " Well, duh. It was the biggest recession in history. Some would say depression. Trump is crashing into 100 days and hasn't even filled his cabinet. At the rate he keeps firing people, he never will. There is a huge leadership void in this administration. "Sad."
52
Qll these idiots will just have to learn first hand that slashing public spending cuts GDP at 3 time the rate of the spending cuts because multiplier effect is the same on the way down as the way up.
Truck traffic and intercity car travel has already fallen off noticeably.
Truck traffic and intercity car travel has already fallen off noticeably.
31
Econ 101 taught me that the multiplier effect for $1 was around seven - of course, that was back in 1976, so I am probably behind the times. My my, how the multiplier effect has dwindled, just like the fortunes of 99% of Americans have.
2
unease comes from the thought that banking and investment regulation will be curtailed which will lead to financial crimes and massive downturn. We can see all the harbingers on the horizon. these are (1) a right wing regulatory environment mixed with white nationalism; (2) massive tax cut proposals; (3) the hint of a widening escalating war stance. These are all echoes of the Bush years- Remember- the Bush tax cuts; the Mission Accomplished; and the collapse of Lehman. Just you wait and see. meanwhile those of us with liberal views and fat bank accounts will be able to get 25% on investments when the credit crunch arrives. Dismal Donnie - the liar will be caught up in his own web of lies- he spoke to hate which requires scapegoats- yes there are things wrong but it is capitalism and not immigrants and school teachers and climate scientists who are the problem. Capitalism- remember Romney saying he was being attacked for being successful. Well Bain Capital made a fortune breaking up companies and sending the proceeds to off shore banking havens. Makers and takers baby!
Fascinating look at people’s economic outlook.
If you supported Trump, you’re optimistic about the economy; if your candidate lost, the sky is falling and the economy can’t possibly do well without a Leftist in charge.
As usual, reader comments are more interesting than the article. Most readers are fans of Obama’s running of the economy endure. Truly Alternative Facts
If you supported Trump, you’re optimistic about the economy; if your candidate lost, the sky is falling and the economy can’t possibly do well without a Leftist in charge.
As usual, reader comments are more interesting than the article. Most readers are fans of Obama’s running of the economy endure. Truly Alternative Facts
5
SPK implies that Obama was a "leftist." Tell that to the people whose 401K accounts were destroyed by Bush, then saved by Obama.
2
Typical Trump Supporter.....lies first, truth never....
2
I am not a fan of Obama, because as a "centrist," he essentially accepts the corporate center policies that have eaten away at the economy. The centrist democrats like the Clintons and Obama are corporate supply siders just like Jeb and dubbya. They hire the same global banksters to run treasury, make cuts to safety nets, give subsidies to corporations, and make the same tired arguments that there is no money for the government to invest in education, healthcare, or infrastructure, so everything has to be privatized.
They also support the same "trade deals" that are race to the bottom investor protection deals that gives global corporations the power to shop from country to country looking for the least protections for labor, consumers and the environment.
Centrist democrats and Republicans are basically Tea Party lite. They are all selling us out to global corporations, while giving lip service to the small businesses and small farms that the policies are decimating.
If I thought Trump was actually against any of these policies, I might be able to hold my nose at his lying and bigoted ways and support his policies too. But he is just a billionaire trying to steal as much as he can under the cover of the mass confusion he is creating. In a few months he will declare TPP fixed and sign it, just as Hillary would have done.
The way to make the world and the economy better is to distribute political and economic power to the little guy. That is not Trump and not the "center."
They also support the same "trade deals" that are race to the bottom investor protection deals that gives global corporations the power to shop from country to country looking for the least protections for labor, consumers and the environment.
Centrist democrats and Republicans are basically Tea Party lite. They are all selling us out to global corporations, while giving lip service to the small businesses and small farms that the policies are decimating.
If I thought Trump was actually against any of these policies, I might be able to hold my nose at his lying and bigoted ways and support his policies too. But he is just a billionaire trying to steal as much as he can under the cover of the mass confusion he is creating. In a few months he will declare TPP fixed and sign it, just as Hillary would have done.
The way to make the world and the economy better is to distribute political and economic power to the little guy. That is not Trump and not the "center."
If partisanship is a great indicator of outlook, then your outlook would also be a great indicator of partisanship. Reading the comments not hard to tell your reading the NYT.
4
Reading your inability to use "you're" properly, it's not hard to guess which side you're on.
1
There's a reason why residents of "flyover" country are ignored. Nothing will ever knock the giant chips off their shoulders.
1
On Republican spelling, I am a trucker out here amongst the Trump crazies. Here are my two favorite bathroom graffiti misspellings:
"Obama is satin!"
"Obama is a trader to our country!"
Well, Trump loves his poorly educated, and they love him right back.
"Obama is satin!"
"Obama is a trader to our country!"
Well, Trump loves his poorly educated, and they love him right back.
5
Don't you get it? Many of us don't see Trump as a fairly-elected president.
That is just a fact. Until someone can explain why Jeff Sessions openly lied, under oath, about his contact with the Russians then this government will not be regarded as legitimate.
That is just a fact. Until someone can explain why Jeff Sessions openly lied, under oath, about his contact with the Russians then this government will not be regarded as legitimate.
99
Well, it's time you "got it." Trump is elected. He's our president. It's you who cannot accept reality. Never mind how you appear to everyone else. You don't want to know.
2
Voted for Trump! Since November (election) we invested $750K in equipment and automobiles. Our sales have already increased by 20 percent. As a company owner, I adjusted my team members compensation in reflection to the growth. This is what happens when business does well. We all grow together. Stop jumping on the wealthy and business as the problem. We are the driving force of America. Hang on tight for an amazing boom in our economy.
16
Your optimism is like a Trump promise, without merit.
2
You don't mention what business you're in, but I can imagine a 20% growth is a good sign. Good for you and good for your team as you "share the wealth" which works well for all. I missed the part in the article where there was any jumping on the wealthy or businesses, what I think can be said, and verifiable, is the pooling of wealth by a few that is NOT shared with the "team" is not good for the economy as a whole. The problem is not that there are wealthy folks, there always has been, the problem is way too many now don't share with their team so I'm glad you're setting an axample of how it works best for all. Income inequality is the issue, not rich or business.
4
Not so fast. On the BBC after midnight today I heard a businessman. who is also an economic expert, say that if there are border taxes on import goods that will cause consumer goods to rise. It will risk fanning inflation. Then there will most likely be a reciprocal response from other nations putting tariffs on our exports--especially those countries affected like Mexico and China. Then he went on to say that the Federal Reserve will most likely step in and increase the interest rate. That will make loans more expensive and so would be the cost of doing business. The only thing that might save us is the set of Republicans who are orthodox in their beliefs against imposing import taxes.
1
I had a conversation with a Trump supporter before the election in which she made the generalized statement that the country was no better during the eight years Obama was in office. I countered that the stock market had tripled and the unemployment rate had halved. To which she responded "Well, I don't believe those numbers". A pretty good way to never lose an argument, wouldn't you say?
305
Yes, and it would be a lot more convincing if the same people that claim they don't believe the numbers when the are against their beliefs, didn't jump on the same numbers as evidence when they happen to go the opposite direction.
Saying that good numbers under Obama were fake, but the same numbers under Trump are proof that he is doing a good job (especially when he hasn't actually implemented any policies yet) is a pathetically transparent kind of hypocrisy that only works when talking to pundits from global corporate mass media, who are programmed to accept such nonsense as normal political discourse.
Saying that good numbers under Obama were fake, but the same numbers under Trump are proof that he is doing a good job (especially when he hasn't actually implemented any policies yet) is a pathetically transparent kind of hypocrisy that only works when talking to pundits from global corporate mass media, who are programmed to accept such nonsense as normal political discourse.
2
Economic policies promoted by the Republican Party remain based in "supply-side" arguments; cut taxes on the rich and their investments will create a wave of economic growth. This economic theory has been shown to be utterly incorrect; take Kansas as the most recent example. Trump's idea for a large investment in infrastructure is a approximately six years late and has yet to be accomplished. He remains a volatile leader with his focus and discipline challenged on a daily basis; in the meantime, China corners world the solar panel market and is now focused on robotics, self-driving cars, and high end manufacturing automation. China invests in the market in which domination is desired; the United States is in the process of cutting research and development in the sciences and medicine, resulting in the US job creation engine being hamstrung as to where to invest. Republicans are optimistic because they believe their President is good at checkers. Democrats are pessimistic because they believe the "so-called" President does not understand running the country is more like playing chess, that he does not have the capability to play a good game of checkers, and that he is not even at the board. Trump is not the man to manage our economic development; indeed he has already shown that he favors China by killing TPP.
50
I get furious when I hear so often on the nightly news: record closing on Wall St. today! -profits at a record high! -CEO package worth millions of dollars!
When for decades the average "middle-class" has been forced to make critical trade-offs:
should I help with my child's college tuition or save more for retirement? Do I really need a new winter coat this year, or should I try to start an emergency savings account? Can I get another year out of this car?
Yes, most of us can afford a fancy micro-brew or new phone once in a while. But that is bitter consolation when wages have not advanced in thirty years, we can't afford a down payment on a small house, we must choose between tuition or retirement.....while Wall St. is rolling in it, and demanding more tax-breaks.
No wonder these two groups view our economy differently.
We are living in a country that actually has two different economies.
-
When for decades the average "middle-class" has been forced to make critical trade-offs:
should I help with my child's college tuition or save more for retirement? Do I really need a new winter coat this year, or should I try to start an emergency savings account? Can I get another year out of this car?
Yes, most of us can afford a fancy micro-brew or new phone once in a while. But that is bitter consolation when wages have not advanced in thirty years, we can't afford a down payment on a small house, we must choose between tuition or retirement.....while Wall St. is rolling in it, and demanding more tax-breaks.
No wonder these two groups view our economy differently.
We are living in a country that actually has two different economies.
-
359
Face it. We are living in two different countries. At least two.
2
The problem with your argument is that people registered as Democrats are statistically not poorer than Republicans. Shoot, many of the reviled Goldman Sachs bankers are registered Democrats. I can believe that there is indeed a difference in expectations, as the article suggests, but see no evidence that the difference in rooted in present economic circumstances.
2
As a Democrat who has seen the destruction that Republicans can do to the economy, (Reagan, Bush, Bush) and the struggle it is for hard working Democrats to put it back together (Clinton, Obama) I am cutting back on my consumer spending and putting a little more away to survive the coming Republican depression.
108
The disparity in opinion regarding future prosperity based on political beliefs does not surprise me. After Obama beat Romney in 2012, I decided to sell my company. I knew that Obama was not pro business, pro economy or even pro America. All I could envision was continued decline. After the election of Trump, I wish I had my business back.
5
What FACT, not alternative fact, can you cite to to support your statement that Obama was not pro-America? His political views may be different than your's, as I suspect mine are, but to state he was not pro-America is an attempt to box in those whose views depart from your own. No one has a monopoly on patriotism.
5
wow, you were wrong in 2012 and you're wrong now.....
3
You shouldn't have sold your company during Obama's presidency. You could have succeeded during those years just as many of us did. What was wrong with Obama's numbers that would cause you to be pessimistic? And what would cause you to believe that Trump is the answer, particularly after his chaotic failures? Prosperity is just a state of mind, I guess. There's no other way to explain it.
1
We have had a steady sustained recovery because the sequester created certainty. It's also the reason the recovery has been slow with slow growth.
Businesses invest, people buy homes, cars and other big ticket items based on predictability not based on regulation or tax policy. The reason I'm pessimistic is there is likely to be real change now that gridlock may be over. Real change in policy is unpredictable. Donald Trump is highly unpredictable. Reducing regulation may very well increase liability as much as it greases the wheels for growth.
We are heading into unpredictable times regarding foreign policy, tax policy, regulation and government spending. I suspect while Democrats may be pessimistic and Republicans optimistic investment will be tepid until policy is actually implemented and businesses and people understand both the risks and rewards of investing in their future.
Gridlock while politically unattractive creates predictability. Good luck trying to read the tea leaves on where this administration and congress is taking us.
Businesses invest, people buy homes, cars and other big ticket items based on predictability not based on regulation or tax policy. The reason I'm pessimistic is there is likely to be real change now that gridlock may be over. Real change in policy is unpredictable. Donald Trump is highly unpredictable. Reducing regulation may very well increase liability as much as it greases the wheels for growth.
We are heading into unpredictable times regarding foreign policy, tax policy, regulation and government spending. I suspect while Democrats may be pessimistic and Republicans optimistic investment will be tepid until policy is actually implemented and businesses and people understand both the risks and rewards of investing in their future.
Gridlock while politically unattractive creates predictability. Good luck trying to read the tea leaves on where this administration and congress is taking us.
45
Investment is driven by demand. The Fed throw trillions at global banks, and when asked why they were not investing it in the economy, they said they were waiting for demand to come back. What is the point of expanding inventories if consumers cannot afford to buy?
When you invest in the People, by making sure they can afford education, health care, transportation, etc, then they are more able to spend money to buy things. When companies are having a hard time keeping up with demand, they can find someone who will invest in them.
The supply side argument is a big lie designed to talk the rest of us into giving tax cuts to corporations (even though most small businesses are not corporations) and billionaires who use their money to manipulate markets and government.
Yes stability is helpful when companies are trying to make decisions based on prediction of the future. Republicans kept yelling about "uncertainty" when Obama was in office, but if they were really interested in certainty they would have compromised with the Democrats, made stable tax rates and stable regulations, not tried to shut down the government, and generally throw sand in the works whenever possible.
When you invest in the People, by making sure they can afford education, health care, transportation, etc, then they are more able to spend money to buy things. When companies are having a hard time keeping up with demand, they can find someone who will invest in them.
The supply side argument is a big lie designed to talk the rest of us into giving tax cuts to corporations (even though most small businesses are not corporations) and billionaires who use their money to manipulate markets and government.
Yes stability is helpful when companies are trying to make decisions based on prediction of the future. Republicans kept yelling about "uncertainty" when Obama was in office, but if they were really interested in certainty they would have compromised with the Democrats, made stable tax rates and stable regulations, not tried to shut down the government, and generally throw sand in the works whenever possible.
4
What exactly are red-statists betting on, that dominionist deregulation of industry in service of their god-given directive to use up the planet while laying waste to life on earth will unleash the prosperity-gospel promised to the coal-roller gun-rack set?
57
Large cities, that vote Democratic, profited from globalization ; rural and small cities, that vote Republican, and where depleted of jobs.
The increasing economic outlook split reflects the hope in fly over country that Trump will reverse, or at least slow down , some of the damage wrought be outsourcing .
This is not a US specific development. The same development can be seen in Europe, where the division between right and left has been replaced by pro and anti globalization parties.
The increasing economic outlook split reflects the hope in fly over country that Trump will reverse, or at least slow down , some of the damage wrought be outsourcing .
This is not a US specific development. The same development can be seen in Europe, where the division between right and left has been replaced by pro and anti globalization parties.
11
Reading financial comment sections and blogs the month before the election and the month after the election was illuminating (but not surprising). Trump supporters before the election would parrot every Trump utterance that the government data was phony, fake or fixed. After the election, Trump supporters are running around like the town crier claiming the government data shows the Trump effect is working, even though there was no change in data collection or analysis and little change in the actual statistics. Consumer sentiment or business optimism is all about belief, not facts. Whether such optimism is justified, only time will tell.
46
Pocketbook mindsets are real as rain and as dangerous as a loaded gun. Economic hard scrabble is everywhere as brick and mortar stores are closing and debt is rising. Credit card companies are on a roll again creating new means and methods of "not paying off your monthly balance". Many, many more cards are emerging and the selling of SBA loans are reoccurring TV ads as if money is free. AMAZ shares are approaching $1,000 and Jeff is on the cusp of owning everything on earth. China is laughing at America's want of cheap stuff and appears safely in the black for manageable GDP growth. Coal miners still suffer black lung disease amid poverty and ignorance in Coal Country. Raytheon shares are likely undervalued as Tomahawk technology will soon be adapted to flying drones and go-carts. Consumer sentiment is tied to MSNBC and FOX News while some Newsmen Anchors are thinking party patty cakes and good times are over.
16
What's so surprising? Before the election, Trump told his supporters the unemployment numbers were rigged and the unemployment rate was really 30- 40% instead of the 4.7% Obama got it down to. After the election, amazingly the unemployment rate really is 4.7% and Trump takes credit for it.
119
All of a sudden the idle rich are employed.
JohnnyF,
And to think that this all happened in less than 100 days without passing any legislation!
And to think that this all happened in less than 100 days without passing any legislation!
4
Anyone who can remember the Duke and the Dauphin from "Huckleberry Finn" can immediately identify the nature of the charlatan in the White House and the skeletal vampire in his closet. Our Republic is at a turning point; we must choose between our diversion: In Bawd We Tryst, and our heritage: In God We Trust.
4
One can trust the universe to be equally indifferent to all possible concerns of flora or fauna.
David Congdon is more optimistic because some nasty government regulations will soon be off his back. You know the ones: safety and consumer protections which probably cost him money, and the absence of which will strengthen his court cases when he is sued.
Nirvana!
Nirvana!
49
David Henry he will also be happy there will now be a justice on the U.S. Supreme Court who puts a trucking company's interest ahead of safety and that of a truck driver's life who could have froze to death in 17 below zero weather in Minnesota who was fired for leaving his load of meat after waiting hours only to see that no tow truck showed up so choice was save his job but risk having both legs amputated due to frost bite or risk a reasonable chance or hypothermia and dying in the cold.
6
The neglect of Gresham's Law has reached criticality in the US. The bad drives the good out of every context where there is no enforced lower bound on the conduct of the participants. The formation of guilds to enforce rules of conduct was crucial to the evolution of civilization. Now we rely on governments to do this.
2
Some look to history when making predictions...and some just drink the kool-aid and make wishes...
10
Boom or Bust? Secure or Fearful?
For me I see two groups one feeling secure the other fearful.
Fear is the motivator! Trump thinks scaring people into action or no action is a plan. And of course he is the savior.
For me I see two groups one feeling secure the other fearful.
Fear is the motivator! Trump thinks scaring people into action or no action is a plan. And of course he is the savior.
8
Illegal government. “If one-third of the population cut their consumer spending by 5 percent, you get a recession.”
3
Regardless of political leanings everyone I know wants to see prosperity. This so called divergence is a reflection of how many see the future. With such nasty political campaigns sentiment that my candidate not yours is best have minimalized objectivity. The lens we view the world through are no longer rose colored..
So it should come as no surprise that American's do not agree on the economic future. Tomorrow the earth will (probably) still be spinning on its axis, some will be happy about the state of affairs and some will be worried. Life as we know it will go on. My crystal ball says large swings in volatility will rule. Money will pour in and out of the markets as we see swings in volatility. Retirees with their savings in 401(k),403(b) accounts will see historically low returns for at least the next 10 years and we will see a major recession. These types of swings will influence elections, governments may fall and some will say the sky is falling. Still on Palm Sunday 2027 the earth will still turn on it's axis. Politics and who the world leaders are will not change the basic fact that most people want prosperity and are willing to work for it or at least make their money work for it.
So it should come as no surprise that American's do not agree on the economic future. Tomorrow the earth will (probably) still be spinning on its axis, some will be happy about the state of affairs and some will be worried. Life as we know it will go on. My crystal ball says large swings in volatility will rule. Money will pour in and out of the markets as we see swings in volatility. Retirees with their savings in 401(k),403(b) accounts will see historically low returns for at least the next 10 years and we will see a major recession. These types of swings will influence elections, governments may fall and some will say the sky is falling. Still on Palm Sunday 2027 the earth will still turn on it's axis. Politics and who the world leaders are will not change the basic fact that most people want prosperity and are willing to work for it or at least make their money work for it.
1
Consumer confidence drives the economy, not the President but his knee jerk reactions have an impact. Trump inherited a pretty good economic situation in spite of the eight years of obstruction. The reduction and removal of regulation sounds great to Trump voters but look at the results of those policies in 2008. Seasoned economists don't know what will take place in the future because we've never been in this situation before. We've never had a President that project's so much uncertainty which will end up in instability. Having no policy at all has never been tried before. So the nation will march into the economic unknown with tax cuts for corporations and the rich, an elevated deficit which oddly takes place under all Republican Administrations and the ever widening gap between rich and poor will expand to the extent never seen before.
Anyone that tells you what may happen here is not paying attention to the chaos in the budget, trade relations, health care, infrastructure and foreign policy decisions which impact the stock market and the economy.
Just be happy if we all make it through the next four years without another depression or war.
Anyone that tells you what may happen here is not paying attention to the chaos in the budget, trade relations, health care, infrastructure and foreign policy decisions which impact the stock market and the economy.
Just be happy if we all make it through the next four years without another depression or war.
99
We are having a rise in student loan default and car load default. And no major new media is willing to report the unhappy news. Regardless of GDP growth at 2.5%, inflation rate of 2%, and new employment numbers, we owe a lot of money. Stock market does not represent the economy. When I see the stock market hit all time high, I wonder what would happen if FED starts tightening.
6
I'm appalled by the quality of the writing in the majority of the comments I'm reading at this early hour in Massachusetts (about 5:15 a.m.). The same could be said for the quality of the thinking.
Related to the second sentence, take a look at "Presidents and the U.S. Economy: An Econometric Exploration" by Alan Blinder and Mark Watson to get an idea of Dems' vs. Reps' influence on the U.S. economy: https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.20140913. You can also check out Larry Bartels' "Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age."
There's additional work out there on this sort of stuff.
I have no non-intellectual incentive to promote these materials.
Related to the second sentence, take a look at "Presidents and the U.S. Economy: An Econometric Exploration" by Alan Blinder and Mark Watson to get an idea of Dems' vs. Reps' influence on the U.S. economy: https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/aer.20140913. You can also check out Larry Bartels' "Unequal Democracy: The Political Economy of the New Gilded Age."
There's additional work out there on this sort of stuff.
I have no non-intellectual incentive to promote these materials.
2
I do not see a reason to be optimistic. My small business is getting more difficult to manage than ever. There is seemingly little interest in my clientele to spend money. They aren't asking for quotes. In my eye this has been the case since the two candidates were established.
We are bombarded by difficult to swallow news on a daily basis. We are fractured and divided. And I, perhaps foolishly, am hoping it gets better once tax season is over? But I have my doubts. I keep cutting my expenses, but I no longer make enough to pay all my bills. And I know many who are in the same position that I am.
It would seem my niche is not what it used to be and I'm not sure it will ever return to it's former value. I'm an artisan.
We are bombarded by difficult to swallow news on a daily basis. We are fractured and divided. And I, perhaps foolishly, am hoping it gets better once tax season is over? But I have my doubts. I keep cutting my expenses, but I no longer make enough to pay all my bills. And I know many who are in the same position that I am.
It would seem my niche is not what it used to be and I'm not sure it will ever return to it's former value. I'm an artisan.
67
I think we are done for as artisans.I live in Santa fe the purportedly 3rd largest art market in the country and every artist that I know here is struggling .Lean times ahead for those of us not in the health care or financial services industry.
1
McConnell and the Republicans had it figured out: Say "No" to everything then blame the Democrats for doing nothing. They also endlessly promoted a fictional dystopian worldview where every economic success was somehow either a failure or a lie. In short, they poisoned the well. Now, that they are in power, everything looks different and their narrative has changed.
27
A 'Recession' is when your neighbour loses his/her job.
A 'Depression' is when you lose your job.
Maybe Republicans are more optimistic because they still think Donald Trump will be able to re-write the rules of world trade in favour of the U.S. without any appreciable reaction from the rest of the world.
Good luck on that one. It didn't work very well in 1930.
A 'Depression' is when you lose your job.
Maybe Republicans are more optimistic because they still think Donald Trump will be able to re-write the rules of world trade in favour of the U.S. without any appreciable reaction from the rest of the world.
Good luck on that one. It didn't work very well in 1930.
17
Five years ago, I was on a tour bus on the Amalfie Coast in Italy. Behind me, sat a self-described Romney girl who complained how oppressed she was under the Obama economy. When she got off the bus, she walked into a 5 star hotel. We should all be so oppressed.
26
Trump people are dunces of the highest magnitude. Two years from now when they have not regained gainful employment, when their health insurance premiums have soared causing them to drop their coverage, when the poisons released into the streams and waters because of deregulation starts to work its ways into their systems and makes them feel ill, when no infrastructure spending is forthcoming, and no tax relief is in sight; they will be still cheering for the non existent future that Trump has sold them and will never be theirs.
20
Yeah but at least gays won't be able to marry, transgender people will be kept out of bathrooms, more Americans will be in prison than ever before, and abortion rights will be gone. That is all that was important to a pretty significant portion of his voter base.
1
Presidents don't control the economy. Can't any Americans look past their tiny little noses anymore?
4
There's a well known phenomenon on Wall Street that stock prices climb a "wall of worry". As long as a large percentage of people are worried about the economy or are predicting doom, stock prices won't get out of hand. When everyone is ebullient that's the time to cash out.
Much of the political divide seems to be on how one regards Obama's economic policies in comparison to Trump's promises. Overturning restrictive regulations on businesses is one area. Democrats see a repeat of 2008 while Republicans see economic growth higher than the sluggish 2% seen during the past 8 years. That's taken as a whole. At a personal level, one's opinion is going to be colored by job prospects, healthcare costs, and investments, esp. 401Ks.
Much of the political divide seems to be on how one regards Obama's economic policies in comparison to Trump's promises. Overturning restrictive regulations on businesses is one area. Democrats see a repeat of 2008 while Republicans see economic growth higher than the sluggish 2% seen during the past 8 years. That's taken as a whole. At a personal level, one's opinion is going to be colored by job prospects, healthcare costs, and investments, esp. 401Ks.
1
Is this really that surprising? I believe there is a simpler dynamic at play. For many who identify as Democrat we have been hearing a constant refrain that the economy in our country favors the wealthy, that the divide between the haves and have nots is growing, the "system" is rigged, college is unaffordable, Wall Street is bad. The list goes on. It is no surprise that a Republican Presidential win has those who vote Democrat fearful. And with nearly all the economic experts agreeing the longest bull market in history is getting very long in the tooth, as soon as the market corrects the Democrats will be sure to blame Trump just as they have hailed President Obama for having saved the economy.
2
Democrats are learning to play by Republican rules. Trump breaks it, he owns it.
5
I was taught Econ 101 based on Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations":
Economies do better when lots of people have lots of money to spend on goods and services.
Economies do less well when lots of money accumulates in just a few places.
The GOP is all about the second statement. There is a century of legislation and consequent history to prove this. In the US, in every state, in every country in the world. Small government. low taxes, low regulations work in the favor of the rich and powerful, and to the detriment of the people, the society that supports those businesses. Businesses pay as little as possible, abuse their workers as much as possible, pollute as much as possible and put out as shoddy merchandise as possible with no regulation or oversight. And the macro-economy suffers, like Dicken's London. Like the US before labor unions. Like the GOP Great Depression and the GOP Great Recession.
Politics are politics, and people believe what they like, but history is clearly on the side of countries with good economies redistributing wealth from the rich to the poor, as Adam Smith advocates for in his well reviewed book.
Economies do better when lots of people have lots of money to spend on goods and services.
Economies do less well when lots of money accumulates in just a few places.
The GOP is all about the second statement. There is a century of legislation and consequent history to prove this. In the US, in every state, in every country in the world. Small government. low taxes, low regulations work in the favor of the rich and powerful, and to the detriment of the people, the society that supports those businesses. Businesses pay as little as possible, abuse their workers as much as possible, pollute as much as possible and put out as shoddy merchandise as possible with no regulation or oversight. And the macro-economy suffers, like Dicken's London. Like the US before labor unions. Like the GOP Great Depression and the GOP Great Recession.
Politics are politics, and people believe what they like, but history is clearly on the side of countries with good economies redistributing wealth from the rich to the poor, as Adam Smith advocates for in his well reviewed book.
291
I don't believe that the GOP is only interested in the wealth accumulating for the few. The GOP would like to see small businesses succeed and reduced government regulations so that those small businesses could be less burdened.
I have two sons who are small business owners. One is struggling to deal with the 41% increase in health care premiums toward his employees due to the affordable care act and the other son has had to raise wages of young employees whose jobs are sufficiently flexible that new overtime pay requirements propose a substantial legal risk to himself and therefore get in the way of the growth of his business and the opportunities for his employees and possibly the ability to grow and hire new people.
I have two sons who are small business owners. One is struggling to deal with the 41% increase in health care premiums toward his employees due to the affordable care act and the other son has had to raise wages of young employees whose jobs are sufficiently flexible that new overtime pay requirements propose a substantial legal risk to himself and therefore get in the way of the growth of his business and the opportunities for his employees and possibly the ability to grow and hire new people.
1
"Businesses pay as little as possible, abuse their workers as much as possible, pollute as much as possible and put out as shoddy merchandise as possible with no regulation or oversight."
The very definition of China and more and more American companies are employing the same tactics.
The very definition of China and more and more American companies are employing the same tactics.
Yes, Adam Smith's invisible hand was based on small business owners trading to make everyone more efficient.
Most small business owners are not incorporated. Changing the corporate tax rate will only make their biggest competitors more profitable, at the expense of the infrastructure that small businesses depend on, like roads and communications. Letting coal mining companies throw poisoned mud from mountaintop removal into the backyard streams of out of work miners will only make coal shareholders richer. It will mean less jobs, because no one will be paid to clean up the mess.
Most small business owners are not incorporated. Changing the corporate tax rate will only make their biggest competitors more profitable, at the expense of the infrastructure that small businesses depend on, like roads and communications. Letting coal mining companies throw poisoned mud from mountaintop removal into the backyard streams of out of work miners will only make coal shareholders richer. It will mean less jobs, because no one will be paid to clean up the mess.
1
Consumer expectations are beside the point. Lender expectations are what stimulate the economy through the private bank debt money supply. We could also see an expansion of the fiscal money supply if we stopped trying to "pay for the deficit" with further issuance of Treasuries, or at brought back QE.
No one examplifies the stark partisan divide/perception on the economy than Trump himself. Before the inauguration Trump told people not to believe the 4.8% unemployement; the same guy who praising the similar data came out this past February as his 'instant miracle'. No 'genius' can convience Intel to make decision of building a new semiconductor factory to create new jobs in a couple weeks; this type of decision is planned a few years ahead of time.
9
It seems that nobody is ready yet to acknowledge that what you look for is what you get, whether adhering to rigid concepts of objectivity or wildly flailing in partisan rancor. All these systems of analysis are being exposed as creative acts, objectivity is a farce to blur the motivations for action.
1
No one should be surprised about people starting to have a partisan line on the economy. The economy is partisan. It is only the false narrative that there is a public sphere called politics which is independent and separate from a private sphere called the economy that has upheld the faux non-partisanship for so long.
1
The issue as I see it is not will Trump bring some economic growth, but what will happen when the boom goes bust again, as it did with G.W.B.
Will there be enough rationality left to pick up the pieces?
Will there be enough rationality left to pick up the pieces?
The truth of the matter is that much of what defines our economy is well beyond the levers of government available to Presidents and Congress regardless of party, excepting extreme measures like TARP.
The prices of oil and natural gas have a great deal to do with economic activity as byproducts of both are major inputs into almost every aspect of the economy. For example, modern commercial food production uses about 10 calories of input for each calorie of food on our plates. The fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides and such are all sourced in oil and gas. Large amounts of fuel drive tractors and other heavy equipment in the fields and trucks carry raw farm output to market, to processing and from food plant to the grocery store. Even the inks used on the box and the plastic lining in cans or wrappers is based in oil and gas. Other industries have similarly dependent profiles concerning energy input.
Trump, Ryan and McConnell will doubtless do everything they can to serve their paymasters, much of which will in the long run be detrimental to our environment and our economy. Tax cuts and deregulation may cause a short term sugar high for some, but the bill always comes due later.
The prices of oil and natural gas have a great deal to do with economic activity as byproducts of both are major inputs into almost every aspect of the economy. For example, modern commercial food production uses about 10 calories of input for each calorie of food on our plates. The fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides and such are all sourced in oil and gas. Large amounts of fuel drive tractors and other heavy equipment in the fields and trucks carry raw farm output to market, to processing and from food plant to the grocery store. Even the inks used on the box and the plastic lining in cans or wrappers is based in oil and gas. Other industries have similarly dependent profiles concerning energy input.
Trump, Ryan and McConnell will doubtless do everything they can to serve their paymasters, much of which will in the long run be detrimental to our environment and our economy. Tax cuts and deregulation may cause a short term sugar high for some, but the bill always comes due later.
4
None of this is surprising in the current political environment where sloganeering and personal vendettas have replaced reasoned analysis and discussions. Economic trends can obviously remain below the surface for a prolonged time before becoming apparent. The roaring twenties, the 1990's tech bubble, the housing crises all were preceded by environments where many preferred to just "let the good times roll". The Obama era was defined by a cautious and reasoned approach to many problems. That was successful despite the crass attempts of character assassination defined by Trump's birther movement more than any other. We are still reaping the benefits of his approach. Economic trends take a long time to make themselves felt. The question now is whether a ruling order that prefers to ignore science, has no empathy for the suffering of so many fellow citizens and prefers to eliminate government efforts to protect consumers, provide health care, address global warming, fix rather than replace the possible impending Medicare and Social Security default can produce any kind of positive long term economic trend. The answer may take a couple of years but could easily be devastating.
10
As the jobs that Trump promised would make America rich again do not appear, the Republican voter who already has financial problems will find that their optimism has been riddled with holes.
It won't be Democrats alone who will slow their spending, but those who already spend almost nothing except for necessities will find they are still doing that as a matter of course.
As an old pop song went "I don't know nothing about arithmetic" but I do know that when we begin bombing in Syria without a back up plan, and congress tries to kill a medical insurance bill by replacing it with one that costs vast sums more, and the GOPers can't get their act together about the yearly budget, I am going to put my money in a coffee can for the foreseeable future.
It won't be Democrats alone who will slow their spending, but those who already spend almost nothing except for necessities will find they are still doing that as a matter of course.
As an old pop song went "I don't know nothing about arithmetic" but I do know that when we begin bombing in Syria without a back up plan, and congress tries to kill a medical insurance bill by replacing it with one that costs vast sums more, and the GOPers can't get their act together about the yearly budget, I am going to put my money in a coffee can for the foreseeable future.
7
Consumer Sentiment is nothing but a feel-good number. A classic case of how Economics attempts to quantify feelings into hard numbers. That said, the astronomical increase is easily explained: The Republicans were constantly fed a load of negative disinformation by their preferred media and then their preferred candidate. When he got elected, those same forces turned on a dime, and flooded the airwaves with "Happy Days are Here Again" though nothing has really changed. All those "sheep" feel better and their easily influenced attitudes changed massively.
10
The only thing that will change, during the next four years, is the persception of statistics. To Trump supporters any good economic news, now, will be believed when before it was deemed untrue.
3
I suspected something like this, without having seen the numbers. I think a cause for the change among Republicans is rooted in their totally unrealistic assessment of the economy under Obama. To hear Trump last year you would think we lived in 1932. Things were never as bad as he described. We had slow growth, but it was long-term, steady growth, held back mostly by the GOP Congress.
The market growth since the election has delighted some Republicans with cash to invest, but I don't see fundamentals to support the rise in stock prices. A huge infrastructure investment would help, but the economy is at nearly full capacity now, so it would have to be done over many years, and of course, I can't see a GOP Congress supporting it.
I am a Democrat waiting for the bubble to burst, then I will invest in an index fund. I am also heavily invested in organizing for Democrats to win in 2018.
The market growth since the election has delighted some Republicans with cash to invest, but I don't see fundamentals to support the rise in stock prices. A huge infrastructure investment would help, but the economy is at nearly full capacity now, so it would have to be done over many years, and of course, I can't see a GOP Congress supporting it.
I am a Democrat waiting for the bubble to burst, then I will invest in an index fund. I am also heavily invested in organizing for Democrats to win in 2018.
10
Is it partisanship to believe that a government of kleptocrats ran by political neophytes that so far have proved incompetent at running the country will not be able to sustain the strong economy left by the previous administration? Is it partisanship to believe that a president who's credentials is to have plundered a successful real estate empire into catastrophic bankruptcy then ran casinos into a devastating bankruptcy(for others) and then pretty much ran a small family con job licensing business into the white house, will not be able to stand to the scrutiny of the entire world? Then call me a partisan of common sense.
12
History is on the Democratic side. No amount of words will change that.
8
History doesn't take sides. You'd be foolish to believe anything else.
1
Right, it show us the mistakes and then we repeat it. No amount of words will change that.
"The eye sees only what the mind is prepared to comprehend." (Henri Bergsen)
The mechanism and limits of perception in how individuals and collectively whole portions of societies construct the world we live inside of has been studied for over 100 years. But the fragility and arbitrariness of humans grip on something reasonably resembling reality has yet to really sink in.
The modern age with its tsunami of "choices" and packaged retail images HAS NOT HELPED with this human weakness. Nor has the diminution of religion on the popular mind proved to be any sort of panacea. We should stop kidding ourselves.
Many features of modern existence are mere amplifiers or accelerators not cure-alls. Just as hands-free phone use while driving has not ended the problem of distracted people mowing down innocent others while piloting 2000 lb. death missiles (cars), so in general, living-while-distracted is proving to be deadly.
Basic features of our lives are fundamentally not designed for robust human flourishing, either physically, intellectually, or morally. Our weaknesses are being exploited by the logic of marketers, politicians, profiteers, and ourselves. The only answer is a tenacious grasp on simplicity, living-for-livings-sake, and a rigorous embrace of truth, no matter how inconvenient it might be.
Just managing to somehow "crush those bad people into humiliated, powerless non-existence" would not fix what ails us.
The mechanism and limits of perception in how individuals and collectively whole portions of societies construct the world we live inside of has been studied for over 100 years. But the fragility and arbitrariness of humans grip on something reasonably resembling reality has yet to really sink in.
The modern age with its tsunami of "choices" and packaged retail images HAS NOT HELPED with this human weakness. Nor has the diminution of religion on the popular mind proved to be any sort of panacea. We should stop kidding ourselves.
Many features of modern existence are mere amplifiers or accelerators not cure-alls. Just as hands-free phone use while driving has not ended the problem of distracted people mowing down innocent others while piloting 2000 lb. death missiles (cars), so in general, living-while-distracted is proving to be deadly.
Basic features of our lives are fundamentally not designed for robust human flourishing, either physically, intellectually, or morally. Our weaknesses are being exploited by the logic of marketers, politicians, profiteers, and ourselves. The only answer is a tenacious grasp on simplicity, living-for-livings-sake, and a rigorous embrace of truth, no matter how inconvenient it might be.
Just managing to somehow "crush those bad people into humiliated, powerless non-existence" would not fix what ails us.
3
Reading all these polls and numbers is just like the election. 90% chance HRC will win until she lost. These numbers are so different because the DEM's are sure trump is nuts and will fail while the GOP has hi hopes. They hated President Obama and HRC so bad that the win has them in euphoria land. Really only time will tell!
2
As a Democrat, I have no problem, first, admitting that the Democratic party let the nation down over the last 17 years, in local and federal government, in not doing enough to solve the ever growing income inequality, and second, allowing the chance for a business oriented person to lead the government.
The negative consumer sentiment, for me, since Trump became President is because, knowing Trump over 30 years, he is not a businessman, his businesses failed in the 90's, and I believe since then he has been making his money through TV and more "creative" ways, Russian connections, as he is a con artist and a dishonest, non-empathetic person.
He has proven this by having no vision, telling constant lies, putting in one of the most pro Wall Street cast of characters and incapable personnel, his son-n-law and daughter? to run and lead the nation.
The economy is not terrible by any means, but we are going through a material transformation, combining the retiring baby boom generation, and the incredibly fast movement of technology leaving a very large group of people unable to find jobs because of being under educated.
I guess the Republican moderates that voted for him, are either so desperate that they remain in a fantasy. or do not understand the Republican party continued their march to funnel money to the very few at the expense of the majority of Americans which will only lead us to yet another financial failure.
The negative consumer sentiment, for me, since Trump became President is because, knowing Trump over 30 years, he is not a businessman, his businesses failed in the 90's, and I believe since then he has been making his money through TV and more "creative" ways, Russian connections, as he is a con artist and a dishonest, non-empathetic person.
He has proven this by having no vision, telling constant lies, putting in one of the most pro Wall Street cast of characters and incapable personnel, his son-n-law and daughter? to run and lead the nation.
The economy is not terrible by any means, but we are going through a material transformation, combining the retiring baby boom generation, and the incredibly fast movement of technology leaving a very large group of people unable to find jobs because of being under educated.
I guess the Republican moderates that voted for him, are either so desperate that they remain in a fantasy. or do not understand the Republican party continued their march to funnel money to the very few at the expense of the majority of Americans which will only lead us to yet another financial failure.
9
I disagree that it was entirely the democratic party that let the nation down regarding economic inequality. Republicans existed during the times when income inequality was a much closer gap. They are the ones who pushed the policies and gerrymandered the districts which enabled the republican party to march further to the right. AND they knew very well what they were doing!
There is only so much that a president can do to influence the economy. Presidents should have people in their administration who have business experience, but the president should NOT be that person. Why? Because a business oriented person tends to thinks that THEY are right and tends to have limited understanding of the other responsibilities in governing. Such as why government must view some activities (example - financial support of the poor) as truly a role of government.
There is only so much that a president can do to influence the economy. Presidents should have people in their administration who have business experience, but the president should NOT be that person. Why? Because a business oriented person tends to thinks that THEY are right and tends to have limited understanding of the other responsibilities in governing. Such as why government must view some activities (example - financial support of the poor) as truly a role of government.
5
Markets go up & markets go down.. This is already the 3rd longest expansion since WWII. By any kind of common sense when something is cyclical and overpriced and of much longer duration than average, what do you expect to happen? We've been out of the market since spring of 2015 so as a Democrat my pessimism has nothing to do with Trump. That said, I'm confident he'll either goose the last gasps out of the economy into a larger bubble & collapse than was otherwise coming or do equally stupid things to prolong our misery after the collapse.
Much of this is marketing. Bill O'Reilly on Fox News said that the economy didn't improve under President Obama, and Republicans believed that, despite record stock market, household wealth, and employment level. Republicans willingly disregard the data because Fox News reinforced their view that a mixed race President is illegitimate.
In the case of Democrats views changing recently, to go from President Obama to President Trump was a horrific shock. It forced Democrats to realize that the U.S. is not the inclusive, rational place they thought it was.
Republicans will continue to vote against their own economic interests, and the Democrats simply have to outnumber them.
In the case of Democrats views changing recently, to go from President Obama to President Trump was a horrific shock. It forced Democrats to realize that the U.S. is not the inclusive, rational place they thought it was.
Republicans will continue to vote against their own economic interests, and the Democrats simply have to outnumber them.
10
Gifted in omission and misrepresentation, Republicans lead economic discussions with a sucker's bet. Voters and Democrats fall into its trap.
Democrats should break from the traditional fights over taxes and debt. They should propose planning, training and operating models that reorganize economic relationships to share prosperity between the wealthy and the workers, find markets with sustainable growth, emphasize cooperation over competition, using American core skills to return the US to the world’s number one economic engine and the global leader in quality of life.
GOP policies are the dust tracks of the past, the well-worn routes of tax reform, deregulation, shrinking safety nets, stagnant wages. Democrats must propose new structures based on globally successful models propelling middle class growth in countries like Ghana, Zambia, Nigeria (despite corruption and terror), Botswana. (Multinational investors are using Mauritius' unique trade and tax agreements (free capital movement, tax grants) to invest in Africa.)
Led by Brasil (40%), Costa Rico, Chile, Peru are sustaining Latin America's fastest growing middle classes. China is building the globe's most ambitious infrastructure, rails and sea ports, connecting Asia/Africa/Europe; lowering costs, increasing efficiency.
In the next decade, global middle class spending will expand from $21 trillion to $51 trillion!
The US, esp. the GOP, has no plan or vision for this tectonic shift in global middle class growth.
Democrats should break from the traditional fights over taxes and debt. They should propose planning, training and operating models that reorganize economic relationships to share prosperity between the wealthy and the workers, find markets with sustainable growth, emphasize cooperation over competition, using American core skills to return the US to the world’s number one economic engine and the global leader in quality of life.
GOP policies are the dust tracks of the past, the well-worn routes of tax reform, deregulation, shrinking safety nets, stagnant wages. Democrats must propose new structures based on globally successful models propelling middle class growth in countries like Ghana, Zambia, Nigeria (despite corruption and terror), Botswana. (Multinational investors are using Mauritius' unique trade and tax agreements (free capital movement, tax grants) to invest in Africa.)
Led by Brasil (40%), Costa Rico, Chile, Peru are sustaining Latin America's fastest growing middle classes. China is building the globe's most ambitious infrastructure, rails and sea ports, connecting Asia/Africa/Europe; lowering costs, increasing efficiency.
In the next decade, global middle class spending will expand from $21 trillion to $51 trillion!
The US, esp. the GOP, has no plan or vision for this tectonic shift in global middle class growth.
16
Walter, you've got my vote!
Note sure what's the source of your information but the countries you listed are sinking fast
2
Botswana's per capita 2015 income was US$18,815 (according to the World Bank), an average higher than China's. It and Ghana (US$1.858/2015) are classified as middle income countries (MICs).
Costa Rica is fourth in Latin American growth, averages 74% of the world's average income, with a per capita of US$12,900, and has "very good competitive level, with advances and developments in infrastructure, technology and macroeconomic stability".
Check the rest. The stereotyped of yesterday's economic thinking are inadequate and inaccurate, existing as frozen stereotypes that allowed China to leap forward in its growth over the US. The unverified idea, the narrative that these countries are "shrinking fast" isn't supported by observation, facts, or data. This is exactly my point!
Costa Rica is fourth in Latin American growth, averages 74% of the world's average income, with a per capita of US$12,900, and has "very good competitive level, with advances and developments in infrastructure, technology and macroeconomic stability".
Check the rest. The stereotyped of yesterday's economic thinking are inadequate and inaccurate, existing as frozen stereotypes that allowed China to leap forward in its growth over the US. The unverified idea, the narrative that these countries are "shrinking fast" isn't supported by observation, facts, or data. This is exactly my point!
Reality of course is that the situation is unchanged from 4 months ago, or 14 months ago, or arguably 4 years ago. The stock market has experienced a Trump bump by pricing in a lot of unrealistic expectations and long dated bonds have moved up mainly because of anticipated Fed action but all the other leading indicators are essentially unchanged. Effective full employment; historically low rates; low inflation; auto market softening but still buoyant; existing home sales around 5.5 million; jobs still being added but the curve flattening; wage growth continuing to tick up; consumer spending softening but still holding up; growth for the year around 2%; etc. etc. The infrastructure fiscal stimulus isn't likely to happen for various reasons so it's business as usual. Where Republicans are wrong is that in reality little can be done to materially change this picture. Trump's promises of 4 to 5% growth are like all his promises total fantasy. And where Democrats are right is that it would only take a few dumb moves by Trump or the Republicans to de-rail this very old expansion (not that expansions have any particular magic duration but they do become more vulnerable as they age).
20
Sane voters have every reason to be pessimistic with the master of bankruptcy and the party of low taxes, low public investment, and large deficits in the White House.
An economy is like an ocean liner at sea; it takes a long while to turn, and once it does it takes a long while to turn again; and unless its crew is especially vigilant, they may not see the iceberg until it is too late.
Imagine how much peril must lie ahead, however, when the crew is deliberately instructed by the captain and his enablers to not see an iceberg, to not consider the possibility that an iceberg can exist, for fear that this eventuality will prove an inconvenient imposition?
An economy is like an ocean liner at sea; it takes a long while to turn, and once it does it takes a long while to turn again; and unless its crew is especially vigilant, they may not see the iceberg until it is too late.
Imagine how much peril must lie ahead, however, when the crew is deliberately instructed by the captain and his enablers to not see an iceberg, to not consider the possibility that an iceberg can exist, for fear that this eventuality will prove an inconvenient imposition?
31
We are no longer dealing with SANE voters, Mathew....
3
I agree with those who are amazed but politics and partisanship have extended to economic forecasts. I mean the dismal science is just that – dismal.
That said, anything that concerns the future can hardly be totally scientific, say the climate science deniers.
For years the investment community. Has been excoriated anytime they miss a big economic change. Predicting investment risk, while based on data, can be far off the mark. The unknown factor is always consumer confidence and consumer spending.
I'm a Democrat with a great fear for the future. I believe we're still riding the last quarter of the Obama expansion, but I know how little it takes for the market to take a dive and people to close their wallets. I thought the stock market run up, benefiting me personally, was scary.
I still do. I think we have a good chance of being in a bubble, based on unrealistic expectations that don't take account of the wildly unpredictable actions,and possible threats posed by Donald Trump. If enough people are fearful, the vaunted expansion stops.
I also think partisan gridlock Will prevent some of the better economic proposals Trump made – on infrastructure particularly – to become stalled. As for tax reform, well: are tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations really going to make the economy boom?
Oh we know the rich will get richer and the poor will get poorer. Doesn't that usually occur under the influence of corporate greed?
That said, anything that concerns the future can hardly be totally scientific, say the climate science deniers.
For years the investment community. Has been excoriated anytime they miss a big economic change. Predicting investment risk, while based on data, can be far off the mark. The unknown factor is always consumer confidence and consumer spending.
I'm a Democrat with a great fear for the future. I believe we're still riding the last quarter of the Obama expansion, but I know how little it takes for the market to take a dive and people to close their wallets. I thought the stock market run up, benefiting me personally, was scary.
I still do. I think we have a good chance of being in a bubble, based on unrealistic expectations that don't take account of the wildly unpredictable actions,and possible threats posed by Donald Trump. If enough people are fearful, the vaunted expansion stops.
I also think partisan gridlock Will prevent some of the better economic proposals Trump made – on infrastructure particularly – to become stalled. As for tax reform, well: are tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations really going to make the economy boom?
Oh we know the rich will get richer and the poor will get poorer. Doesn't that usually occur under the influence of corporate greed?
255
We also have to consider what will happen if Congress does find a way to repeal Obamacare. That a fifth of the economy remains uncertain has to have some kind of drag on growth.
3
Unfortunately Obama proposed an infrastructure program, seconded by Prof.Krugman, partially got through but the main plan was stalled by those great 'progressives minds McConnell and Cantor
@Maryanne: spot on. If the health law repeal had gone through, it would have been a huge corporate windfall over and above any tax reform package.
3
Just as "truth" is to some degree perspectival, so too so-called "objective reality" has a lot of subjectivity within it. Many Trump voters were or at least felt left behind by the recovery, which has been slow and somewhat weak over time. Many of them are also on the bottom half of the socio-economic ladder.
Voters in or near retirement who are fortunate enough to have significant savings in the stock market and who had the stomach to stay there during the downturn, have done very nicely in recent years (well before Trump) as the markets roared back. This group, too, is likely to hold fewer Trump voters.
Those of us with a historical perspective also know that this recovery is growing old; that the markets cannot roar on forever.
Folks who have not been doing well, whose 'wealth' is minimal and/or disappeared in the G. Recession, naturally hunger for radical change. Trump painted himself as a savior to the struggling promising the jobs of the good-old-days. It is easy when things are very tough to buy into the notion that change in how things have been - any change, but especially radical change, will bring a new, bright, shining time. In exchange for buying into that promise, many Trump voters were willing to turn a blind eye to much about the man which deeply concerns those of us who were not looking for (or needing) a savior: inconsistency, loose relationship with the truth, ignorance about gov't, foreign affairs, and a host of other things... we'll see.
Voters in or near retirement who are fortunate enough to have significant savings in the stock market and who had the stomach to stay there during the downturn, have done very nicely in recent years (well before Trump) as the markets roared back. This group, too, is likely to hold fewer Trump voters.
Those of us with a historical perspective also know that this recovery is growing old; that the markets cannot roar on forever.
Folks who have not been doing well, whose 'wealth' is minimal and/or disappeared in the G. Recession, naturally hunger for radical change. Trump painted himself as a savior to the struggling promising the jobs of the good-old-days. It is easy when things are very tough to buy into the notion that change in how things have been - any change, but especially radical change, will bring a new, bright, shining time. In exchange for buying into that promise, many Trump voters were willing to turn a blind eye to much about the man which deeply concerns those of us who were not looking for (or needing) a savior: inconsistency, loose relationship with the truth, ignorance about gov't, foreign affairs, and a host of other things... we'll see.
81
Catastrophic change is in the wind, if we cannot eliminate the very possibility of accumulating great wealth from our national economic model. No Republic in history has survived the rise of a hereditary oligarchy. Corporate capitalism has outlived its utility.
While optimism can be a powerful driving force - self-fulfilling prophecy - the economy has been healing in spite of obstructionism from the Republican controlled Congress. To be fair, the extreme left did not help the matter either. Still, as Stephen Colbert pointed out Trump's fake proclamation, this administration has inherited a fortune. Time will tell if it ends up creating a mess.
For now, things don't look good. A lot of time and resources were wasted on Obamacare repeal. Tax reform is going nowhere (perhaps one should be grateful considering the Republican idea - per Ryan and Brady - of a Border Adjustment Tax will no doubt destroy the country's retail sector already teetering: Payless has just filed for bankruptcy and closing stores and last quarter job numbers include a -30,000 retail jobs!) And where is that $1T infrastructure program? So Trump decided to bomb Syria just for show. The Syrian warplanes (probably with the help from Russia) managed to take off the very next day!
So now we have all talks and no action. Again, no action may be better than bad action! Trump's core constituents will not get what they yearn for. Coal? Natural gas is aplenty. Ryan et al are determine to rob the poor and give it to the rich.
Sadly, looking at the situation objectively, self-fulfilling prophecy may meet with its nemesis, grand delusion of the masses.
For now, things don't look good. A lot of time and resources were wasted on Obamacare repeal. Tax reform is going nowhere (perhaps one should be grateful considering the Republican idea - per Ryan and Brady - of a Border Adjustment Tax will no doubt destroy the country's retail sector already teetering: Payless has just filed for bankruptcy and closing stores and last quarter job numbers include a -30,000 retail jobs!) And where is that $1T infrastructure program? So Trump decided to bomb Syria just for show. The Syrian warplanes (probably with the help from Russia) managed to take off the very next day!
So now we have all talks and no action. Again, no action may be better than bad action! Trump's core constituents will not get what they yearn for. Coal? Natural gas is aplenty. Ryan et al are determine to rob the poor and give it to the rich.
Sadly, looking at the situation objectively, self-fulfilling prophecy may meet with its nemesis, grand delusion of the masses.
31
I think the best result that I can hope for is that NOTHING gets done or changes for the next 4 years. What the Republicans want will do more harm than good.
14
Facts have nothing to do with either the Dems or the Reps opinions on the economy. Nothing. Their opinions are just that: opinions--actually ranting--for and against Don Trump. We live in the age on instant, society-wide communication of the words (usually little-connected to facts or logic) of tens of millions of commenters, bloggers, columnists, tweeters, editorialists, etc. etc. Everyone's opinion is equal and is transmitted to everyone else. Regardless of the seriousness of the thinking behind it. What a waste.
23
The whole pathetic USA is sliding down the tubes with gathering momentum. Sleaze rules and lies prevail here.
The "both sides do it" argument again, which prevents critical thinking and/or fortifies the fantasies of third party nihilists.
This "thinking" gave us Trump, and the ensuing chaos.
This "thinking" gave us Trump, and the ensuing chaos.
10
Boom/bust is not a democrat or republican issue; history tells us we have and have had up and downs every decade. It's a normal and acceptable economic cycle. The markets do what the markets do primarily on what the policy of the day is. Creation/new tech and inventions help change and mold. Governments with business/corporate influence in policy will dictate how are future markets will and do operate. How many truckers will Mr. Congdon's optimism hire when Tesla and Google and the other major auto companies divert all resources to automated drivers? It's their policies that will dictate that economy. Then what do we then do with the displaced worker/consumer? A new policy to address this new economic issue.
19
Computer-controlled vehicles will all become bombs in the event of a Carrington event, which will lobotomize every computer. And such an event can be artificially created with an atmospheric nuclear burst; it doesn't have to wait for the sun.
1
"Boom/bust is not a democrat or republican issue; history tells us we have and have had up and downs every decade. It's a normal and acceptable economic cycle."
Well the booms curiously happen when we have Democratic administrations and the busts when we have Republican ones. The last two Democratic presidents have left very healthy economies to their successors; the last 3 Republican presidents (including Deity Reagan) not so much.
Well the booms curiously happen when we have Democratic administrations and the busts when we have Republican ones. The last two Democratic presidents have left very healthy economies to their successors; the last 3 Republican presidents (including Deity Reagan) not so much.
10
The Trump budget if passed will involve a big deficit, and cause high unemployment some businesses. Some contractors could profit, and the ones that art targeted to do so, are dominated by activist investors that will use any extra profits to pay themselves higher dividends.
Those coal miners will not see any job, and the auto workers will only see some employment in the skilled trades like electrical, robot repair and such.Watch the fund investors, that is where the money is, and that is what brings investment into the economy. Trump's bullying and loud mouth only cause uncertainty. Now this attach on Syria should cause selling in the market since no one knows what the repercussions will be.
There has been a lot of debt piling up by those who think the economy will get better fast. History is not in their favor. If the GOP get their way with the Fed, it will take money out of circulation which causes deflation,just like 2008.
Those coal miners will not see any job, and the auto workers will only see some employment in the skilled trades like electrical, robot repair and such.Watch the fund investors, that is where the money is, and that is what brings investment into the economy. Trump's bullying and loud mouth only cause uncertainty. Now this attach on Syria should cause selling in the market since no one knows what the repercussions will be.
There has been a lot of debt piling up by those who think the economy will get better fast. History is not in their favor. If the GOP get their way with the Fed, it will take money out of circulation which causes deflation,just like 2008.
34
I did not vote for trump but hilary never connected with IT, manufacturing, construction, small business owners and more oriented to public agencies, public school teachers(the largest individual employment category of college educated according to BLS), and more regulation(which is good in doses). The problem for her is that everyone of those people were going to vote for her anyway so trump was able to energize the groups I mentioned above who may have sat on the fence. I can't tell you how many time normally placed IT or engineer types would say "I get L, G, even bi but what the heck is the obsession with T" and bathrooms..again did not gain her a single vote but energized the opposition. Trump is not that polished or thoughtful but as I go to retirement and my daughters get married over next 3-4 years I hope they and their male husbands have some old time job opportunities. Again, my crowd is all college educated private sector types who say "we know trump can't bring everything back but when was the last time you hear Hilary(or Obama) even talk about traditions "white guy"or "small business" jobs.
19
You hit the nail on the head.
She was a terrible candidate from Day 1.
She was a terrible candidate from Day 1.
2
When did you last run into anyone with a sound education in anything resembling the Liberal Arts? College graduates today know more about their team's standings than they do about history, science, geography, or their cultural heritage.
7
Talk is cheap, Alan. Look at the number of jobs, including white collar, added in the last eight years. tRump can lie all he wants about whatever he wants, but the proof will be the pudding at the end of the year. And it will have a sour taste.
5
The Republicans are banking on Personal , corporate tax reductions for the wealthy, plus tax reductions for the same group in any Health Care legislation.
Add to this an infrastructure program
They plan to pay for this largesse by projecting a sustained growth rate of over 4 percent, more than double the current rate.
Fat chance, Auto Sales have stalled , the roof is falling in on Commercial real estate due to a change in the structure of the retail business. This will result in a loss of jobs in retail and construction.
Higher interest rates will impact residential housing and consumer spending in general which comprises 65 percent of our GDP. Higher health care costs exacerbated by reduced subsidies for the middle class will add further misery.
Then of course Government jobs are going to be reduced significantly.
The upshot will be our deficit will grow beyond control and will be an open invitation to Ryan to reduce benefits for those who have earned Medicare and Social Security.
Add to this an infrastructure program
They plan to pay for this largesse by projecting a sustained growth rate of over 4 percent, more than double the current rate.
Fat chance, Auto Sales have stalled , the roof is falling in on Commercial real estate due to a change in the structure of the retail business. This will result in a loss of jobs in retail and construction.
Higher interest rates will impact residential housing and consumer spending in general which comprises 65 percent of our GDP. Higher health care costs exacerbated by reduced subsidies for the middle class will add further misery.
Then of course Government jobs are going to be reduced significantly.
The upshot will be our deficit will grow beyond control and will be an open invitation to Ryan to reduce benefits for those who have earned Medicare and Social Security.
203
I share your bleak vision. As Trump continues to break campaign promises on just about everything, exploding the deficit, I to believe Paul Ryan will come gunning for just about every last vestige of the social safety net--except government pensions naturally.
I can just hear the rhetoric now: "we need to tighten our belts for future generations. And unless we do this by breaking the backs of the lower middle classes, we can't be strong."
The GOP always looks out for its own. You can bet your last dollar that those who can afford to pay most will somehow escape and pay the least as a proportion of income.
Paul Ryan: hypocritically enjoying government help when his family needed it, but pulling up all those ladders once he was firmly ensconced in Congress.
I can just hear the rhetoric now: "we need to tighten our belts for future generations. And unless we do this by breaking the backs of the lower middle classes, we can't be strong."
The GOP always looks out for its own. You can bet your last dollar that those who can afford to pay most will somehow escape and pay the least as a proportion of income.
Paul Ryan: hypocritically enjoying government help when his family needed it, but pulling up all those ladders once he was firmly ensconced in Congress.
91
Add to that that International tourism to America is declining and will sink further if Trump demands to see everyone's Facebook password at the border. Mexico is looking to buy its corn from Argentina. Trump wants to impose a 20% tariff on Imports. Throwing millions of people off Obamacare will cost millions of jobs in the healthcare sector. The billionaire class doesn't care of course because they've all got dual citizenship in Switzerland or New Zealand so when it all falls apart they'll just get on their Jets and fly away.
8
Taxes are not preventing rich people from buying anything now.
5
The results reflect Trump's approach to his job. The Dems fear his unpredictability and the GOP is operating as usual, rolling back regulation regardless of the harm it engenders, talking tax cuts for everyone without consideration for loss of income, and, not fearing their inability to pass anything through that knothole of a Congress. Dumb is happy.
71
As a realist who has never bought into the consumer mindset I understand that the president has little control over the economy. Trump hasn't brought in a wealth of jobs, coal isn't coming back, and selling cars to China isn't going to be nearly as easy (who knew?) as he's counting on. He can only take credit for the results of Obama's economy for so long. And when that happens - if not before - then there's always the option of kicking the war machine into gear. There's a Navy strike group cruising toward the Korean area of the Pacific Ocean as I type. What could go wrong?
336
Before you punch in a war, consider your adversary's potential for a counter-punch. At the end of the first round, the belligerents don't go into their corners; they are dead and rotting in the ring.
1
China will not even buy cars without European level fuel economy, so gutting the fuel efficiency standards will just make car exports harder to make.
2
Trump's policies seem to move around as though he were spinning a "wheel of Fortune."
Just consider how his Syria policy has changed! Effective business/economic policy (actually all policy) requires careful analysis of the second and third (and perhaps more) orders of effect in order to avoid unintended consequences. I believe that the simplistic logic and understanding Trump has of the workings of the economy may lead to a very unstable economic condition. I have taken my money out of the market.
Just consider how his Syria policy has changed! Effective business/economic policy (actually all policy) requires careful analysis of the second and third (and perhaps more) orders of effect in order to avoid unintended consequences. I believe that the simplistic logic and understanding Trump has of the workings of the economy may lead to a very unstable economic condition. I have taken my money out of the market.
89
Trump's policy is to watch TV at night, take advice from Greenhorns who are taking their best guess at what might be applicable, or from Bannon who actively attempts to destroy government and foment instability.
I'm afraid we are going to have to try to weather Trump's "will 'o the wisp" policy until someone gets enough backbone to say "that's enough" and starts proceedings to remove him.
I'm afraid we are going to have to try to weather Trump's "will 'o the wisp" policy until someone gets enough backbone to say "that's enough" and starts proceedings to remove him.
4
If the market collapses, so will your bank. In the event of a melt-down, money will not have any value, but gold, silver and bullets will. So support the market until we can devise a peaceful substitute.
Neither view is consistent with the facts, and as reality sets in over the next four years, we can expect both views to normalize. Democrats will realize that their largely urban habitat is thriving, while rural Republicans will watch their hopes, like their towns, slowly crumble.
152
Everywhere in the world, people are leaving the countryside and moving to cities.
The US, with its utterly moronic dependence of voting power on location, is actually concentrating political power on its dumbest people with the least initiative.
The US, with its utterly moronic dependence of voting power on location, is actually concentrating political power on its dumbest people with the least initiative.
17
Everywhere in the world, people are leaving the countryside and moving to cities.
===================
Really?
People are Fleeing New York at an Alarming Rate
http://nypost.com/2017/04/01/people-are-fleeing-new-york-at-an-alarming-...
===================
Really?
People are Fleeing New York at an Alarming Rate
http://nypost.com/2017/04/01/people-are-fleeing-new-york-at-an-alarming-...
1
Campesino, read your own link! It says nothing to contradict Steve's claim that people are leaving rural areas and moving to cities. Instead, it says:
"Americans have been increasingly relocating from the eastern US and the Rust Belt to cities in Florida, Texas and the Northwest."
So they appear to be moving from one city to another. Nowhere does it say they are fleeing NYC (or anywhere else) for rural areas. Really?
"Americans have been increasingly relocating from the eastern US and the Rust Belt to cities in Florida, Texas and the Northwest."
So they appear to be moving from one city to another. Nowhere does it say they are fleeing NYC (or anywhere else) for rural areas. Really?
1
That's what happens when facts are ignored and decisions are made by unguided instinct. We are in deep trouble with our economy and our politics
62
"Facts ignored?" Like 47,000,000 on food stamps? Taxpayer debt going 2x, to $20,000,000,000,000? 15,000,000+ under-employed? 20,000,000 invade the USA, impinging on legal Americans in hospitals, schools, and roads?
Well, those "facts" are not being "ignored" anymore, after eight long years. Thank God.
Well, those "facts" are not being "ignored" anymore, after eight long years. Thank God.
13
Only 16 years after we paid off the national debt you have a short memory, only 98000 jobs created last minute month not the 135000 we need to stay even.
1
Trump has zero employment plans for scientists and educators.
5
The 2008 recession was the result of loose regulation of the mortgage market. Thieves took full advantage until the system collapsed. President Obama restored credibility to the financial markets with Dodd-Frank and other measures. He appointed top notch people to his cabinet. Trump is undoing all that, letting the "animal spirits" run wild. He is looting our Treasury and using the White House to leverage his business interests. Anyone who thinks this form of magical thinking will sustain our economy is in for a rude awakening. Look for the markets to collapse in May at the earliest or October at the latest. I fear this recession will make 2008 look like a walk in the park.
425
We are in for a fall due mostly to the economic cycle. When that happens, there is a good chance Trump and his minions will only make it worse.
5
Taking risk off the table when nobody was willing to risk anything had nothing to do with the recovery. The bail out did.
Government regulating to reduce risk only helps the economy when the economy is inflating because to much capital is at risk. Regulating after everyone took their money off the table to reduce risk did nothing for the economy. In fact it concentrated more wealth in less banks.
Afte a long slow recovery where risk is back on the government is about to create more risk by deragulating .
The government, when it comes to regulation is doing the opposite of what it should be doing. Obama should have reduced regulation at the height of risk off. Trump is about to do it when risk is on. Thats the nature of politics. It reacts to problems after they occur.
Government regulating to reduce risk only helps the economy when the economy is inflating because to much capital is at risk. Regulating after everyone took their money off the table to reduce risk did nothing for the economy. In fact it concentrated more wealth in less banks.
Afte a long slow recovery where risk is back on the government is about to create more risk by deragulating .
The government, when it comes to regulation is doing the opposite of what it should be doing. Obama should have reduced regulation at the height of risk off. Trump is about to do it when risk is on. Thats the nature of politics. It reacts to problems after they occur.
1
Looting our Treasury?