Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Trump: The economy does better under democrats

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by LiconaFan97 View Post
    Sean, I asked a very simple question: given that Trump was totally out of touch in 2004, what leads you to believe that he now understands the plight of the bottom 98%? Why does understanding the federal reserve, something relatively few understand, help one understand the plight of people facing food insecurity? Why does it help one understand being one paycheck from homelessness? How can understanding something like that possibly compensate for living a life full of wealth and excess?
    It was 2004? I didn't even know it was that long ago. Well. then that explains a lot. I'll try and make it as easy to understand as I can. If a person A understands the complexities of heart surgery, they're obviously closer to understanding how other systems of the body work than person B who doesn't understand heart surgery even if person A is not a medical specialist in others areas of the body. If you understand the mechanics of federal reserve policy and how it affects things like employment and government debt, you're closer to understanding a much less complex subject like basic economics that affects the common individual better than someone who doesn't understand that policy at all.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by seanD View Post
      It was 2004? I didn't even know it was that long ago. Well. then that explains a lot. I'll try and make it as easy to understand as I can. If a person A understands the complexities of heart surgery, they're obviously closer to understanding how other systems of the body work than person B who doesn't understand heart surgery even if person A is not a medical specialist in others areas of the body. If you understand the mechanics of federal reserve policy and how it affects things like employment and government debt, you're closer to understanding a much less complex subject like basic economics that affects the common individual better than someone who doesn't understand that policy at all.
      Like Trump pulling Shultzs', "I know nothing."
      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

      go with the flow the river knows . . .

      Frank

      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by seanD View Post
        It was 2004? I didn't even know it was that long ago. Well. then that explains a lot. I'll try and make it as easy to understand as I can. If a person A understands the complexities of heart surgery, they're obviously closer to understanding how other systems of the body work than person B who doesn't understand heart surgery even if person A is not a medical specialist in others areas of the body. If you understand the mechanics of federal reserve policy and how it affects things like employment and government debt, you're closer to understanding a much less complex subject like basic economics that affects the common individual better than someone who doesn't understand that policy at all.
        I have serious doubts that anyone can truly understand what it's like to have little through any amount of academic knowledge. You either have to live through it or have a lot of contact with people who have lived through it. I've never been anywhere close to food insecurity and I struggle to feel like I have even a tiny idea of what that would feel like. Of course, I'm not an expert on how the fed works so maybe that's my problem .

        I don't think your analogy is that great of one since a heart surgeon is going to have learned all the medical basics in medical school already. You wouldn't trust even a top heart surgeon to opine on issues which only a neurosurgeon would know.

        ETA: I see I missed one of the caveats from your analogy, sorry about that. If person B is a general practitioner then they very well might know more about other areas of the body than person A though. I think there are too many hidden assumptions in this analogy.
        Last edited by LiconaFan97; 09-13-2020, 10:55 PM.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by LiconaFan97 View Post
          I have serious doubts that anyone can truly understand what it's like to have little through any amount of academic knowledge. You either have to live through it or have a lot of contact with people who have lived through it. I've never been anywhere close to food insecurity and I struggle to feel like I have even a tiny idea of what that would feel like. Of course, I'm not an expert on how the fed works so maybe that's my problem .

          I don't think your analogy is that great of one since a heart surgeon is going to have learned all the medical basics in medical school already. You wouldn't trust even a top heart surgeon to opine on issues which only a neurosurgeon would know.

          ETA: I see I missed one of the caveats from your analogy, sorry about that. If person B is a general practitioner then they very well might know more about other areas of the body than person A though. I think there are too many hidden assumptions in this analogy.
          That's just it though, and it is like my analogy. In order to understand the complexities of federal reserve policy, you're going to have dig deep into the economic literature about it (you're not going to find a lot of this information on most mainstream economic sources, hence the reason most folks are completely clueless about it). And in so doing, you're going to learn a lot about basic economics as a byproduct of that research. There's no way Trump understands this policy without him having dug deep into the economic literature at some point to learn about it. Now, as far as how much experience he has in relating to these folks that are suffering on any sort personal level, I doubt you could make that argument about any US president, most of which come from at least some sort of privileged background.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by seanD View Post
            That's just it though, and it is like my analogy. In order to understand the complexities of federal reserve policy, you're going to have dig deep into the economic literature about it (you're not going to find a lot of this information on most mainstream economic sources, hence the reason most folks are completely clueless about it). And in so doing, you're going to learn a lot about basic economics as a byproduct of that research. There's no way Trump understands this policy without him having dug deep into the economic literature at some point to learn about it.
            What evidence do you have that Trump has done this sort of deep dive? I'm aware of his degree but he surely wouldn't have said what he said in 2004 if he were an economics wizard at that point if you're right about why he said that. He bankrupted a casino in 2009, probably the easiest business to make money with outside of a brothel, so it must have been after that point. He sure said some dumb economic stuff in 2016 too so it must have been after then as well. He opined on the fed in August 2019 so he learned all this stuff in the 2.5 years between getting sworn in and August 2019? Didn't he have a country to run?

            And we're drifting off the point. How does the sort of purely academic study you're describing help someone who has lived a life of wealth and excess understand the bottom 98% when he wasn't able to understand them in 2004?

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by LiconaFan97 View Post
              What evidence do you have that Trump has done this sort of deep dive? I'm aware of his degree but he surely wouldn't have said what he said in 2004 if he were an economics wizard at that point if you're right about why he said that. He bankrupted a casino in 2009, probably the easiest business to make money with outside of a brothel, so it must have been after that point. He sure said some dumb economic stuff in 2016 too so it must have been after then as well. He opined on the fed in August 2019 so he learned all this stuff in the 2.5 years between getting sworn in and August 2019? Didn't he have a country to run?

              And we're drifting off the point. How does the sort of purely academic study you're describing help someone who has lived a life of wealth and excess understand the bottom 98% when he wasn't able to understand them in 2004?
              No, I can't prove he actually did the deep dive or when he did it. All I know is he understands it and very few people do. I certainly didn't know anything about the subject in 2004. It was the crash of 2008 that led me to take the plunge, so maybe that's when Trump did too. I'm guessing you either don't understand even basic economics or have never run a business. If you did both, you'd know they have nothing to do with one another. I know that's a leftist trope you guys love to use (Trump went bankrupt, therefore how does he understand the economy, derp) but they aren't even in the same ballpark. I'd say considering he's at the very least a millionaire, possibly a billionaire, and successfully become the POTUS against almost all odds, he's not as clueless or as much of a loser as you guys claim he is, or even as dumb as I oftentimes claim he is.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by seanD View Post
                No, I can't prove he actually did the deep dive or when he did it. All I know is he understands it and very few people do. I certainly didn't know anything about the subject in 2004. It was the crash of 2008 that led me to take the plunge, so maybe that's when Trump did too. I'm guessing you either don't understand even basic economics or have never run a business. If you did both, you'd know they have nothing to do with one another. I know that's a leftist trope you guys love to use (Trump went bankrupt, therefore how does he understand the economy, derp) but they aren't even in the same ballpark. I'd say considering he's at the very least a millionaire, possibly a billionaire, and successfully become the POTUS against almost all odds, he's not as clueless or as much of a loser as you guys claim he is, or even as dumb as I oftentimes claim he is.
                The question I asked was how we can believe that he understands the bottom 98% and you cited his deep knowledge of the fed as somehow dispositive. Now you're conceding that he may not have done the requisite deep dive but still asserting that he understands the fed at a deep level. I have seen absolutely no evidence from his public statements that he understands economics at even a basic level ("Trade wars are good and easy to win", "NAFTA was the worst trade deal in history", "The tax cuts will pay for themselves with growth"). So I'm back to my initial question: how can we have any expectation that he understands the bottom 98% today given that he was clearly out of touch with the bottom 98% in 2004? It sounds like there is no such evidence.

                I understand that economics and business are not one and the same. But bankrupting a casino seems to paint one as less than an economics / business wunderkind who would be able to untangle the complexities of the fed without significant study. And, as I'm sure you are aware, Fred Trump's gifts to Trump amounted to more than $400M in 2020 dollars. I've seen it stated that if he had just dropped that money into an index fund he'd be richer today than even the generous estimates of his wealth. Again, hardly the hallmark of an economics or business genius.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by LiconaFan97 View Post
                  The question I asked was how we can believe that he understands the bottom 98% and you cited his deep knowledge of the fed as somehow dispositive. Now you're conceding that he may not have done the requisite deep dive but still asserting that he understands the fed at a deep level. I have seen absolutely no evidence from his public statements that he understands economics at even a basic level ("Trade wars are good and easy to win", "NAFTA was the worst trade deal in history", "The tax cuts will pay for themselves with growth"). So I'm back to my initial question: how can we have any expectation that he understands the bottom 98% today given that he was clearly out of touch with the bottom 98% in 2004? It sounds like there is no such evidence.

                  I understand that economics and business are not one and the same. But bankrupting a casino seems to paint one as less than an economics / business wunderkind who would be able to untangle the complexities of the fed without significant study. And, as I'm sure you are aware, Fred Trump's gifts to Trump amounted to more than $400M in 2020 dollars. I've seen it stated that if he had just dropped that money into an index fund he'd be richer today than even the generous estimates of his wealth. Again, hardly the hallmark of an economics or business genius.
                  I meant I can't prove he did it and when, meaning I wasn't in the guy's study watching him to do it. The fact he knows about it means he obviously did research it at some point. I can't prove that Fauci studied epidemiology because I wasn't there when he did, but we assume he did. Ask anyone how federal reserve policy works and I guarantee they won't have a clue, that's if they even know what the federal reserve is. You didn't even understand what it does, and probably still don't. In fact, I bet most people will grasp what epidemiology is more than they will the federal reserve and what it does.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by LiconaFan97 View Post
                    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fn3cTT6O1I4

                    Interesting to have his own words on record, and he even backs it up with his performance.

                    Do we take him literally but not seriously or seriously but not literally?
                    No big surprise considering that until very recently he was a liberal Democrat until he had some sort of political epiphany.

                    He said Romney's immigration policy was too restrictive and called for a path to citizenship for all illegals regardless of how many millions that was.

                    He said that the gun control laws passed under Clinton didn't go nearly far enough. The same with Obamacare (he originally favored a single payer system).

                    He favored a wealth tax and left the Republican Party over their opposition to partial birth abortion (saying it was too extreme).

                    But then, to borrow a phrase, it appears that the scales fell from his eyes.

                    I'm always still in trouble again

                    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                    "Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
                    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by seanD View Post
                      No, I can't prove he actually did the deep dive or when he did it. All I know is he understands it and very few people do. I certainly didn't know anything about the subject in 2004. It was the crash of 2008 that led me to take the plunge, so maybe that's when Trump did too. I'm guessing you either don't understand even basic economics or have never run a business. If you did both, you'd know they have nothing to do with one another. I know that's a leftist trope you guys love to use (Trump went bankrupt, therefore how does he understand the economy, derp) but they aren't even in the same ballpark. I'd say considering he's at the very least a millionaire, possibly a billionaire, and successfully become the POTUS against almost all odds, he's not as clueless or as much of a loser as you guys claim he is, or even as dumb as I oftentimes claim he is.
                      Still does not address the facts, and Trump's lies that the recovery of the Bush Depression was under Obama's watch as documented.
                      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                      go with the flow the river knows . . .

                      Frank

                      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        It's pretty well-documented that the economy performs better under democrats. This applies to both democrats controlling congress and them controlling the presidency.

                        Democrats tend to also be better than Republicans at other priorities that Republicans claim to care about, like lowering the deficit, and law and order.
                        "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
                        "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
                        "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by LiconaFan97 View Post
                          Since when has jobs created not been a meaningful metric?
                          Pay careful attention to what I actually said:
                          "Jobs created" is a meaningless statistic in and of itself.

                          Suppose someone created a million jobs that paid $1 a week. Is it really a meaningful measure of economic success to boast "1 million jobs created"? Attempting to describe something as complex as a national economy using a single, over simplified statistic is silly.
                          Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                          But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                          Than a fool in the eyes of God


                          From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            As I have said before, my metric is how well my retirement 401K is doing and how well my own standard of living is doing.

                            Under those metrics, I have done better under Trump than any previous President (even with the pandemic), and I have been working since Jimmy Carter was in office. Under Carter the economy sucked - really bad recession. Probably the worst of my life. Reagan was better but he was dealing with digging us out of Carter's mess. The second worst economy for me was under Obama. Third worse was under the last few years of Clinton and during Bush Jr's first 4 years.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by seanD View Post
                              I meant I can't prove he did it and when, meaning I wasn't in the guy's study watching him to do it. The fact he knows about it means he obviously did research it at some point. I can't prove that Fauci studied epidemiology because I wasn't there when he did, but we assume he did. Ask anyone how federal reserve policy works and I guarantee they won't have a clue, that's if they even know what the federal reserve is. You didn't even understand what it does, and probably still don't. In fact, I bet most people will grasp what epidemiology is more than they will the federal reserve and what it does.
                              Sean,

                              You have provided no evidence that Trump actually understands the fed in any meaningful way and I have never heard him speak on economics on a level that was beyond my capacity to readily follow. Nor have you provided any meaningful explanation of how understanding esoteric economic policy would allow one to empathize with the bottom 98%. Until you can do that I don't think this is going anywhere.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                                As I have said before, my metric is how well my retirement 401K is doing and how well my own standard of living is doing.

                                Under those metrics, I have done better under Trump than any previous President (even with the pandemic), and I have been working since Jimmy Carter was in office. Under Carter the economy sucked - really bad recession. Probably the worst of my life. Reagan was better but he was dealing with digging us out of Carter's mess. The second worst economy for me was under Obama. Third worse was under the last few years of Clinton and during Bush Jr's first 4 years.
                                By that same standard then wouldn't it be fair to say that those who have lost their jobs, lost income, or have entered the workforce and been unable to find quality employment under Trump are worse off?

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                6 responses
                                48 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                42 responses
                                234 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                24 responses
                                104 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                32 responses
                                184 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                73 responses
                                310 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X