Impeachment Hearings

[dimreepr]

19 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

I guess the American voters should be happy with just two choices this Fall...a rude narcissist favouring business over people that can only run an economy by increasing deficit spending...or a well meaning Socialist (Bernie) with lots of promises that has no clue how to run an economy at all.

really... 😏 you know how to run an economy?

Edited February 9, 2020 by dimreepr

[J.C.MacSwell]

Just now, dimreepr said:

really... 😏 you know to run an economy?

Yes.

[dimreepr]

7 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Yes.

ok

[MigL]

Oh, wait...
Did you say 'run' ?

JC thought you said 'ruin'.

[John Cuthber]

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

... people that can only run an economy by increasing deficit spending...

 

If I'm reading the figures right, the last time the US national debt fell was under Clinton.
It's now as high as it's ever been (after a few years under Trump) and rising about as fast as it ever did, but without the excuse of the 2007/08 world wide recession.
It seems to have started climbing steeply under Reagan. It carried on under Bush(I) and leveled out, then fell under Clinton.

 

The current deficit is about a trillion dollars.
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/1-trillion-deficits-return-despite-trump-s-campaign-promises-n1116951

 

[dimreepr]

2 minutes ago, MigL said:

Oh, wait...
Did you say 'run' ?

JC thought you said 'ruin'.

I'm not sure JC knows the difference.

[iNow]

4 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

If I’m reading the figures right, the last time the US national debt fell was under Clinton.

And Obama significantly shrank the deficit. Had his policies been continued, trends suggest they would also have shrank the debt (which has gone up a few trillion dollars under Trump)

[John Cuthber]

So, if you actually look at the evidence, does JC McS's claim hold water?

[iNow]

People are welcome to different opinions. I can’t force them to agree with me, and I’d agree with them, but then we’d both be wrong. 

Edited February 9, 2020 by iNow

[J.C.MacSwell]

2 hours ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

I guess the American voters should be happy with just two choices this Fall...a rude narcissist favouring business over people that can only run an economy by increasing deficit spending, and increasingly reduced environmental regulations...or a well meaning Socialist (Bernie) with lots of promises that has no clue how to run an economy at all.

Of course...AOC has an economics degree...I guess she can help Bernie with that.

Should be read as:

a rude narcissist favouring business over people...

that (Trump) can only run an economy by increasing deficit spending, (and increasingly reduced environmental regulations)

not over "people that can only run an economy by increasing deficit spending"

52 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

So, if you actually look at the evidence, does JC McS's claim hold water?

Has Trump done it any other way?

[dimreepr]

5 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Should be read as:

a rude narcissist favouring business over people...

that (Trump) can only run an economy by increasing deficit spending, (and increasingly reduced environmental regulations)

not over "people that can only run an economy by increasing deficit spending"

Has Trump done it any other way?

Have you?

[J.C.MacSwell]

3 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Have you?

My real name is John Keynes Galbraith...

[dimreepr]

rito...

[J.C.MacSwell]

1 hour ago, iNow said:

And Obama significantly shrank the deficit. Had his policies been continued, trends suggest they would also have shrank the debt (which has gone up a few trillion dollars under Trump)

Link?

[iNow]

1 hour ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Link?

 

The colors represent party. Notice which does better historically. 

[J.C.MacSwell]

49 minutes ago, iNow said:

 

The colors represent party. Notice which does better historically. 

Did you make a typo? I know you know the difference between deficit and debt.

Or did you miss what I bolded: "Had his policies been continued, trends suggest they would also have shrank the debt"

[iNow]

Deficits kept shrinking under Obama. The trend was toward surplus. Once in surplus conditions, debts shrink. Not sure how else to explain. 

[MigL]

One could make the argument that G W Bush did a much better job of reducing the deficit, between the year 2004 to 2008-9, when the Financial Meltdown happened. Even burdened by ongoing wars ( of his own doing, of course ).

B Obama came in when the economy had already tanked, and bail-outs were being handed to any financial institution that asked.
The economy had nowhere to go, but up, and the big deficits were much reduced by the ending of bail-outs and the previously mentioned improving economy.

[J.C.MacSwell]

 

Just now, iNow said:

Deficits kept shrinking under Obama. The trend was toward surplus. Once in surplus conditions, debts shrink. Not sure how else to explain. 

Can you not see this is untrue by the graph you provided? It was increasing for the last couple years prior to Trump increasing it further.

[MigL]

I think we are missing the gist of JC's original comment.
No matter who wins the election this fall, deficits will increase.
( there is no B Clinton on the Democrat ticket )

[iNow]

And why does that matter if deficit spending is good for the economy?

[J.C.MacSwell]

20 minutes ago, iNow said:

And why does that matter if deficit spending is good for the economy?

Because in eventually the GDP to debt ratio become too unfavourable. There comes a point where that can be very damaging to the economy.

48 minutes ago, MigL said:

I think we are missing the gist of JC's original comment.
No matter who wins the election this fall, deficits will increase.
( there is no B Clinton on the Democrat ticket )

I did specifically refer to Trump, and Sanders as the current leading Democrat. 

I think a moderate Democrat could do better...if they can find one...

I do give Trump credit for recognizing and correcting the degree of imbalance in trade with China, but not for the tax cuts, increase in deficit and much of the environmental deregulations...all of which give a boost to the economy, but much of which is temporary.

Edited February 9, 2020 by J.C.MacSwell

[iNow]

13 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said:

Because in eventually the GDP to debt ratio become too unfavourable. There comes a point where that can be very damaging to the economy.

Correct, and we’re no where even remotely near that point given the rates at which others are willing to lend to us 

[zapatos]

https://howmuch.net/articles/the-us-trade-deficit-with-china-2009-2018

In 2019 the trade deficit with China was $345 billion. Trump seems to have restored the trade imbalance back to where it was at the end of Obama's term.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/05/us-trade-deficit-december-2019.html

[J.C.MacSwell]

1 hour ago, zapatos said:

In 2019 the trade deficit with China was $345 billion. Trump seems to have restored the trade imbalance back to where it was at the end of Obama's term.

 

That's quite a significant change.

The US GDP has grown about 8% in that time, China's by over 20%.