Yet another unfortunate truth is revealed.Originally Posted by bajisima
While that may be true, we all know most people evaluate a presidents economic success or failure from the exact dates they are in office. Reality is too complex for most voters.
| | |
We live in an era of bumper sticker politics.
... And to what end? Assuming that the corporate tax cut DOES "gives an average of $1100 back to 70% of the American people," what existing problem would this remedy?
People like getting money back? I know several reports claimed GWBush never would have gotten re-elected without it in 2004. Its pretty powerful. I remember people at the bank in line so excited to have gotten that one. Imagine with close to 50% of Americans not having 400 bucks in the bank, that's a lot.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money...ncy/106216294/
But ole 45, the guy elected in part because he is such a great businessman, can't understand anything beyond bigly is HUUUUGLY good.
The risk being will the recovery happen in time before they run out of capital and pull a Titanic.
Since I have repeated stated that I am a fiscal conservative (again, not a social conservative), if feel obligated to respond. Initially, let me say that you make some excellent points and understand your reasonable perspective regarding them.
Let's start with the market indices. Most assuredly you are correct that they have been consistently increasing since 2010, but the rate increase in this single year is much higher. But let me suggest, that while related, they are not an economic indicator but rather a business indicator. Remember, they were recovering at the same time unemployment was increasing. Such is because, the market indices are based on profits, current and anticipated. Due to the economic circumstances at the time, companies were downsizing to maintain profits. The maintenance of those profits impacted the indices, but caused increased unemployment. Additionally, companies were holding on to their cash and not investing it, that increased their equity position impacting the markets as well. Since profits drive the market, lower corporate taxes increase such profits along with a more business friendly regulatory environment. Less restrictive regulations and a more competitive tax rate in the world market will or should provide the incentives to make domestic operations much more attractive. However, I warn that if the rates are not make competitive to the world market and the regulatory environment made friendlier, than the rate of increase will slow if not end and domestic operations will not increase. Carrier is tired of waiting and already changing its mind, apparently.
While it cannot be argued that whomever sits in the Oval Office has no impact on inflation, I think many would agree that the Federal Reserve and its interest rates have more impact on potential inflation concerns.
It is agreed that unemployment rates via their accepted computational mechanics have remained steady with no real visible improvement. Unfortunately, I think that hides the importance of providing incentives for job creation. The government definitely has the responsibility to provide an environment and the incentives needed to promote job creation, but beyond direct government employment, only the private sector can create that job.
Regarding the value of the dollar, admittedly I cannot respond because I do not perceive myself versed on that issue.
Finally, let me say, while I may support the economic agenda of the President, I must admit that I don't like him as a person. I genuinely wished he would just shut up, stop tweeting and do the job I had anticipated that he would do.
He can't, because he's a fucking moron.
Strictly a gift to themselves. The entire Trump camp is made up of zillionaires. Since it's never been proven that tax cuts as big as these do anything except grow the debt, I hope it fails. Did we really expect anything else from trump?
I'd expect this from any Republican. It didn't start with Trump.
42Thanks
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
