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

Stock Market plunge.

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
    Are you serious? Hannity is blaming the current slump on Obama? Exactly how does that rationalization work?
    Have a read or listen.

    His argument goes that under Obama, the Fed brought in low interest rates to stabilize the economy after the Great Recession, and when you take those low interest rates away, the stock market slumps.

    I would actually agree with that to a fair extent. Of course, Trump could tell the Fed to keep the interest rates low, and stop the slump if he wished. But that fiscal policy would have its own problems.

    As I've said before here, I think Obama's response to the Great Recession was a very poor one (though granted, the Republicans were in 100% obstruction mode and were determined to prevent him doing anything useful to fix the economy) and that flooding the economy with cheap money was a bit of a band-aid on a gaping wound and was only a delay rather than a solution to the underlying problems. So now, in the metaphor, that the Fed is seriously considering ripping the band-aid off, there's problems. But leaving the band-aid on forever has its own set of problems. Of course, Trump is responsible for his own response to the situation, and he can direct the Fed to do something completely different (he should put me in charge of the Fed!), so the long-term underlying economic issues are somewhat Obama's (and Bush W's and Bill Clinton's) doing, but Trump is ultimately responsible now. And certainly if he wants to claim credit for increases in the stock market over the last year (which I don't think he should have) then he has to man-up and take responsibility if it crashes now.
    "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


    • #32
      Originally posted by Starlight View Post
      Have a read or listen.

      His argument goes that under Obama, the Fed brought in low interest rates to stabilize the economy after the Great Recession, and when you take those low interest rates away, the stock market slumps.

      I would actually agree with that to a fair extent. Of course, Trump could tell the Fed to keep the interest rates low, and stop the slump if he wished. But that fiscal policy would have its own problems.

      As I've said before here, I think Obama's response to the Great Recession was a very poor one (though granted, the Republicans were in 100% obstruction mode and were determined to prevent him doing anything useful to fix the economy) and that flooding the economy with cheap money was a bit of a band-aid on a gaping wound and was only a delay rather than a solution to the underlying problems. So now, in the metaphor, that the Fed is seriously considering ripping the band-aid off, there's problems. But leaving the band-aid on forever has its own set of problems. Of course, Trump is responsible for his own response to the situation, and he can direct the Fed to do something completely different (he should put me in charge of the Fed!), so the long-term underlying economic issues are somewhat Obama's (and Bush W's and Bill Clinton's) doing, but Trump is ultimately responsible now. And certainly if he wants to claim credit for increases in the stock market over the last year (which I don't think he should have) then he has to man-up and take responsibility if it crashes now.
      There is merit to the points - but it boggles the mind to lay all of this at the feet of the president, now or then. The fed has a chair, and the chair is largely independent of the executive office. As far as I know, once appointed, they serve a term and are not answerable to the executive branch. So the policies of the fed have been on the shoulders of Greenspan, Bernanke, Yellen, and (now) Powell. The timing of the slump and the change of the fed chairmanship just seems a bit too convenient. I have to wonder just how much the uncertainty of the new chair is playing into the market.

      One thing seems fairly clear: all of the hype about how the tax hike was going to fire the economy seems a bit in doubt, especially now with the "let's ignore the deficit" spending bill that looks likely to pass.

      Fiscal sanity/responsibility seems to be a low priority for whatever party is in power.

      Be that as it may, we are now at a 10% correction. We were overdue for one and, given the length of the bull market, I expect it is likely to be closer to a 20% correction before all is said and done. Over all, the economic fundamentals have not shifted too much, so I suspect we will see a return to climbing in a couple weeks or months. The timing is unfortunate. This would have been MUCH better if it had happened in October. I find myself almost wishing we see a bear market for the next 9 months.
      Last edited by carpedm9587; 02-08-2018, 09:49 PM.
      The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

      I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
        One thing seems fairly clear: all of the hype about how the tax hike was going to fire the economy seems a bit in doubt
        Honestly I was surprised about how clear-headed the thinking about the tax bill generally was, even among economists (whom I generally view with a roll of my eyes and as being generally ignorant and incompetent when they aren't outright paid-off propagandists for the wealthy), as everyone seemed to correctly note that businesses in the current economic environment were already sitting on record levels of cash so giving them more cash was obviously going to have zero effect.

        especially now with the "let's ignore the deficit" spending bill that looks likely to pass.
        There's a quote from a Republican strategist a couple of decades back to the effect that the Republicans should follow a strategy of cutting taxes and running up the deficit, and then when Democrats are in power Republicans should be deficit hawks and thus force Democrats to cut social programs. That overall strategy does seem to be working fairly successfully for the Republicans, so I am hardly surprised to see them ballooning the deficit once again.

        Fiscal sanity/responsibility seems to be a low priority for whatever party is in power.
        What irresponsibilities would you point to on the Democratic side? While I do not like the quantitative easing that Obama was forced to do due to Republican obstructionism, I would say that generally the Dems have been pretty responsible over the past few decades as far as balanced budgets etc go.

        The timing is unfortunate. This would have been MUCH better if it had happened in October.
        Why? To cause people to vote Democratic in the 2018 elections?

        The fed has a chair, and the chair is largely independent of the executive office. As far as I know, once appointed, they serve a term and are not answerable to the executive branch.
        I would have thought the executive can replace the Fed chair at any time? At the very least the Republicans, being in control of all branches of government, can pass anything they want short of a constitutional amendment. So if they really wanted they could alter what is going on at the Fed (though they might have to nuke a Dem filibuster in the Senate to get it through, but they could if they choose to do so).
        Last edited by Starlight; 02-08-2018, 10:17 PM.
        "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


        • #34
          Originally posted by Starlight View Post
          There's a quote from a Republican strategist a couple of decades back to the effect that the Republicans should follow a strategy of cutting taxes and running up the deficit, and then when Democrats are in power Republicans should be deficit hawks and thus force Democrats to cut social programs. That overall strategy does seem to be working fairly successfully for the Republicans, so I am hardly surprised to see them ballooning the deficit once again.
          Yep, that was Jude Wanniski who in 1981 formulated the Republican Santa Claus strategy of cutting taxes, mostly for the rich of course, running up the deficit, and then blaming the economic mess they've made on the incoming democrats when they have to step in to clean up. If you can remember the republican echo chamber was blaming Obama for the mess he inherited from the Bush administration as soon as he took office and they never let up. That's their strategy, has been for a long time, and you're right it has been relatively successful for them because they're basically sociopaths and don't really care about the over all health of the U.S. economy and wrecking it means absolutely nothing to them. And here we go again. Obama pulls us out of the worst recession in U.S. history and now the Republicans come in and cut taxes for the rich which will add 1.5 trillion to the debt. It's like deja vu all over again. Unfortunately their middle class constituency never seems to pick up on con game being played on them.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by JimL View Post
            Yep, that was Jude Wanniski who in 1981 formulated the Republican Santa Claus strategy of cutting taxes, mostly for the rich of course, running up the deficit, and then blaming the economic mess they've made on the incoming democrats when they have to step in to clean up. If you can remember the republican echo chamber was blaming Obama for the mess he inherited from the Bush administration as soon as he took office and they never let up. That's their strategy, has been for a long time, and you're right it has been relatively successful for them because they're basically sociopaths and don't really care about the over all health of the U.S. economy and wrecking it means absolutely nothing to them. And here we go again. Obama pulls us out of the worst recession in U.S. history and now the Republicans come in and cut taxes for the rich which will add 1.5 trillion to the debt. It's like deja vu all over again. Unfortunately their middle class constituency never seems to pick up on con game being played on them.
            I saw a good clip today addressing that topic... Bernie Sanders 15 years ago answering the question of how the Republican party manages to do so well despite having this agenda:



            He basically has two answers to the question, the first (which he spends the first 10 minutes on) is that the media is biased due to being owned by rich people and corporations who consistently take the side of the wealthy-elites on economic issues, and the second answer (which starts at 10:50) is that the Republicans distract people with wedge issues rather than focusing on the things people agree on, in order that the rich donors can run out the back door with all the money.
            "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


            • #36
              Originally posted by Starlight View Post
              Honestly I was surprised about how clear-headed the thinking about the tax bill generally was, even among economists (whom I generally view with a roll of my eyes and as being generally ignorant and incompetent when they aren't outright paid-off propagandists for the wealthy), as everyone seemed to correctly note that businesses in the current economic environment were already sitting on record levels of cash so giving them more cash was obviously going to have zero effect.
              Pretty much. Not to mention that it skews heavily towards not only the wealthy, but also towards bigger small businesses. No surprise, as the total revenue earned drops, the total number of companies in that salary range increases. There are fewer than 100 businesses that realize more than $100B in revenue. There are a few thousand that earn more than $10B. There are 10s of thousands realizing more than $1B. There are millions of small businesses with earnings below than $100,000, and the tax cut is not really going to do much for them. Interestingly, they are collectively one of the largest employment blocks.

              Originally posted by Starlight View Post
              There's a quote from a Republican strategist a couple of decades back to the effect that the Republicans should follow a strategy of cutting taxes and running up the deficit, and then when Democrats are in power Republicans should be deficit hawks and thus force Democrats to cut social programs. That overall strategy does seem to be working fairly successfully for the Republicans, so I am hardly surprised to see them ballooning the deficit once again.
              As a percentage of GDP, the deficit is not significantly out of wack. Indeed, since 1900, it has show three spikes: WWI and WWII were the largest. The Great Recession is the third largest, but substantially smaller than those first two. The Great Depression doesn't show as big a spike as Reagan's deficit spending. In general, though, I'm not seeing a coorelation between party in power and deficit spending. The only time we've had our nose above water since the 1970s was under Clinton, but he benefited from the Internet bubble, which burst shortly after he left office.

              Originally posted by Starlight View Post
              What irresponsibilities would you point to on the Democratic side? While I do not like the quantitative easing that Obama was forced to do due to Republican obstructionism, I would say that generally the Dems have been pretty responsible over the past few decades as far as balanced budgets etc go.
              While I applaud Obama taking action at the start of his term, I was not convinced that all that effort was necessary. I question the advisability of bailing out companies from their own poor decision-making. I tend to think that approaches like those taken in the Great Depression would have been a better strategy. Remember that Democrats had both houses of Congress until 2010, so for Obama's first two years. Yes, we live in an age of obstructionism, and the Republicans WERE obstructing (as the Democrats are now), but some of what did get passed I question.

              Originally posted by Starlight View Post
              Why? To cause people to vote Democratic in the 2018 elections?
              Basically - yes. I believe our government is out of whack. A trifecta at the federal level is not a good idea, and the judiciary is likewise being badly skewed. If it means a bit of pain for a few months to get people out and voting for a change, to bring a bit more parity to government, I believe it is worth it for all of us in the long run.

              Originally posted by Starlight View Post
              I would have thought the executive can replace the Fed chair at any time? At the very least the Republicans, being in control of all branches of government, can pass anything they want short of a constitutional amendment. So if they really wanted they could alter what is going on at the Fed (though they might have to nuke a Dem filibuster in the Senate to get it through, but they could if they choose to do so).
              I was mistaken here. I thought the fed was more independent and could operate without fear of political reprisal. However, the Fed Chair can be dismissed by the president "for cause."

              Upon the expiration of the term of any appointive member of the Federal Reserve Board in office on the date of enactment of the Banking Act of 1935, the President shall fix the term of the successor to such member at not to exceed fourteen years, as designated by the President at the time of nomination, but in such manner as to provide for the expiration of the term of not more than one member in any two-year period, and thereafter each member shall hold office for a term of fourteen years from the expiration of the term of his predecessor, unless sooner removed for cause by the President.


              The Federal Reserve Act does not stipulate what "cause" means.
              The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

              I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by JimL View Post
                incoming democrats when they have to step in to clean up.
                Dems' idea of ''''''cleaning up''''''''' is spend more even more.
                Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Demi also wants to say, progs here going 'how can Hannity blame Obama!!?!??!?!...oh wait he has point' is good stuff. Please continue!!
                  Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by demi-conservative View Post
                    Dems' idea of ''''''cleaning up''''''''' is spend more even more.
                    If I didn't know better I'd think you were an actual middle class republican and a perfect example of the ignorance I spoke of Demi. But I realize that you're just a spreader of fake news doing your best to dumb down the republican constituents. The Republican Party, the pretend deficit hawks, came into office ranting and raving about Democrats spending, and then they proceed to pass a tax cut which will raise the debt by 1.5 trillion and a budget bill that will raise it another 500 billion. In Obama's case, he was forced to spend in order to rescue an economy that was spiraling out of control and into a depression thanks to the cost of republican policies of unnecessary wars, tax cuts, and deregulation. But now the economy, again, thanks to 8 years of responsible leadership, is in much better shape and what do the republicans do as soon as they step in? They immediately enact policies that will raise the debt by another 2 trillion dollars. That's more than the Obama stimulus that republicans fought against when the economy needed it. And do you hear any anger about this reckless spending from their constituency? Of course not. It's like the movie Ground Hogs Day, the same thing over and over again, and the republican voters just never seem to catch on.
                    Last edited by JimL; 02-09-2018, 08:41 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                      I saw a good clip today addressing that topic... Bernie Sanders 15 years ago answering the question of how the Republican party manages to do so well despite having this agenda:



                      He basically has two answers to the question, the first (which he spends the first 10 minutes on) is that the media is biased due to being owned by rich people and corporations who consistently take the side of the wealthy-elites on economic issues, and the second answer (which starts at 10:50) is that the Republicans distract people with wedge issues rather than focusing on the things people agree on, in order that the rich donors can run out the back door with all the money.
                      Yep, part of the republican strategy is definitely to distract people with wedge issues on the one hand as they're busy picking their pockets with the other. I don't necessarily agree that the media is biased, you can find differing opinions throughout the MSM. I mean look at MSNBC, they are owned by COMCAST and you can hardly contend that they take the side of the wealthy-elites on economic issues.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by JimL View Post
                        Yep, part of the republican strategy...
                        You don't know jack about the Republican strategy... all you know is the crap you get in the "liberal talking points for dummies", and you swallow every word and beg for more.
                        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Originally posted by JimL View Post
                          and then they proceed to pass a tax cut which will raise the debt by 1.5 trillion
                          Sounds like Fake News to me! Source?

                          In Obama's case, he was forced to spend in order to rescue an economy that was spiraling out of control and into a depression thanks to the cost of republican policies of unnecessary wars, tax cuts, and deregulation.
                          Obama spent to start unnecessary wars too, prog.

                          But now the economy, again, thanks to 8 years of responsible leadership
                          Says guy that wanted responsible Bernie "give people '''''''free'''''' stuff"???

                          Fact is, if Trump started unnecessary WWIII with Russia despite crazy spending of trillions, you progs would be happy. Sad!
                          Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by demi-conservative View Post
                            Sounds like Fake News to me! Source?



                            Obama spent to start unnecessary wars too, prog.



                            Says guy that wanted responsible Bernie "give people '''''''free'''''' stuff"???

                            Fact is, if Trump started unnecessary WWIII with Russia despite crazy spending of trillions, you progs would be happy. Sad!
                            Why would Trump start a war with Putin, his pal and partner in crime. Heck, he hasn't even done a thing to counteract Putin's attack on our elections. He even nixed the sanctions which Congress overwhelmingly passed in both houses. He's hoping to get Russia's help again in the 2018 elections.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by JimL View Post
                              [ATTACH=CONFIG]26431[/ATTACH]
                              FIFY n/c

                              Just remember that you need to exhale too
                              Attached Files

                              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


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by JimL View Post
                                Why would Trump start a war with Putin, his pal and partner in crime. Heck, he hasn't even done a thing to counteract Putin's attack on our elections. He even nixed the sanctions which Congress overwhelmingly passed in both houses. He's hoping to get Russia's help again in the 2018 elections.
                                This has GOT to be a parody of an ignorant leftist dipwad.
                                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                121 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                321 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                111 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                196 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                360 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X