American Politics 3.0 - Back to Brunch

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Reggie Dunlop

The tipping point might be attacking actual American citizens.

These are just words. Imagine what he will do to them once he is in power.

I wouldn't want to be a brown man walking a dog down the street with Trump as president.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by MegaErtz

There's just no path to victory if Harris loses any one of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.

Not accurate in any shape or fashion. There are many roads to 270 either way. There are so many states in play right now that it could be really close or a blow out either way.

[ThePrince]

Originally Posted by Cappy

It's pretty well known that President/PMs get too much credit/blame for the boom/bust cycles of capitalism.

however, my post was not praising Biden/Harris for their economic miracle, much so to run a counter to many Republicans or "independents" who point to inflation and the cost of living as an indictment against the Biden White House.

If you can't praise Biden for the current economic growth (largely supplied by increased government spending, which would mean that you can pin it on the current admin) then you can't blame Biden for the rising inflation and cost of living in the same way.

This is, of course, part of the irrationality of "economic" voters in general. It's far too difficult to place blame/praise on any one party/government/regime/policy when the global economy is so intertwined. Coupled with the fallout of a major disruption like COVID, it's much trickier.

People can't keep moving goal posts though. In this thread, the consistent messages have said Trump is terrible for the economy, but then when actual data is presented, it gets sidestepped as it was either Obama's policies that led to it, or that he actually didn't have much to do with the economic performance. At the same time, there are plenty of posters saying that Biden/Harris has been great for the economy and the US has had record growth, but that is directly attributable to Biden/Harris policies and Trump had nothing to do with it. You can't have it both ways.

Everything is just spun to fit the narrative, which is incredibly disingenuous.

Personally, I do think the economy did well under Trump. I also think the economy has done well under Biden/Harris. As you rightfully point out, there's a lot of factors for all of this. I don't feel the need to say everything Trump did is terrible and everything Biden is doing is wonderful.

[ThePrince]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

The economy was strong when Trump took office.

The economy was flat on its back when Biden took office.

Can you name one country whose economy wasn't "flat on its back" when Biden took office?

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by ThePrince

Since it takes years for policy to make a difference, is the above because of Trump's policies, since it happened during Biden/Harris?

It takes about two years for policy changes to take effect and be felt through the economy. The impact of Trump's policies (tariffs and tax cuts for the rich) were felt at the tail end of his term and the start of Biden's. Trump put everything on the credit card. Hence the inflation and huge spikes in costs of everything. Biden made changes to policy which we are now feeling and seeing the economy respond well with inflation dropping and jobs increasing.

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by ThePrince

Can you name one country whose economy wasn't "flat on its back" when Biden took office?

Can you name one country that made a significantly better economic recovery from the pandemic than America did?

[ThePrince]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

It takes about two years for policy changes to take effect and be felt through the economy. The impact of Trump's policies (tariffs and tax cuts for the rich) were felt at the tail end of his term and the start of Biden's. Trump put everything on the credit card. Hence the inflation and huge spikes in costs of everything. Biden made changes to policy which we are now feeling and seeing the economy respond well with inflation dropping and jobs increasing.

Interestingly enough, he made no changes to the policies you listed. If the tariffs and tax cuts were so bad for the economy, why didn’t Biden remove them? And how did the economy recover so well if these things were such a detriment?

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

It takes about two years for policy changes to take effect and be felt through the economy. The impact of Trump's policies (tariffs and tax cuts for the rich) were felt at the tail end of his term and the start of Biden's. Trump put everything on the credit card. Hence the inflation and huge spikes in costs of everything. Biden made changes to policy which we are now feeling and seeing the economy respond well with inflation dropping and jobs increasing.

I think I read it's about 18 months for anything to make any impact. So, it was probably a bit more, markets going down the toilet, I know he likes to brag about that.

[ThePrince]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

Can you name one country that made a significantly better economic recovery from the pandemic than America did?

I’m not the one trying to make the case Trump was terrible for the economy. I think we has strong. I also think Biden was strong for the economy. My thinking is consistent. Is yours?

[Paulie Walnuts]

Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction

I don't follow Joe Rogan a lot. Is he actually an open Trump supporter, or just someone who doesn't like the left? I know he speaks out against the left occasionally, but from the little exposure I have had to him, he always struck me as anti-government and and anti-politics in general.

He was RFK Jr, until he found out peddling RFK would take away votes from Trump, so he said he was not suppourting the health minister.

He spreads conspiracy theories and acts dumb, and he is hearing things for the first time.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

It takes about two years for policy changes to take effect and be felt through the economy. The impact of Trump's policies (tariffs and tax cuts for the rich) were felt at the tail end of his term and the start of Biden's. Trump put everything on the credit card. Hence the inflation and huge spikes in costs of everything. Biden made changes to policy which we are now feeling and seeing the economy respond well with inflation dropping and jobs increasing.

Inflation happened because of COVID and related policy and supply chain issues. The subsequent slowdown of inflation recently is a result of direct action and policy decisions from the US Federal Reserve.

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by ThePrince

People can't keep moving goal posts though. In this thread, the consistent messages have said Trump is terrible for the economy, but then when actual data is presented, it gets sidestepped as it was either Obama's policies that led to it, or that he actually didn't have much to do with the economic performance. At the same time, there are plenty of posters saying that Biden/Harris has been great for the economy and the US has had record growth, but that is directly attributable to Biden/Harris policies and Trump had nothing to do with it. You can't have it both ways.

Everything is just spun to fit the narrative, which is incredibly disingenuous.

Personally, I do think the economy did well under Trump. I also think the economy has done well under Biden/Harris. As you rightfully point out, there's a lot of factors for all of this. I don't feel the need to say everything Trump did is terrible and everything Biden is doing is wonderful.

When you balloon the national deficit like Trump did, you're basically withdrawing from the future to make things better now. It's not sustainable long term. Biden couldn't reverse the Trump tax cuts for the rich, which is why deficits continue to be high. Also, investments in infrastructure and climate action were badly needed, and were neglected under Trump.

Trump also slashed environmental regulations across the board and allowed companies to pollute rampantly. Of course removing regulations is economically stimulative, but it comes at a terrible cost.

[opendoor]

Originally Posted by ThePrince

Are people just going to completely ignore that real median wage growth in the US grew faster under Trump than any other President in the last 50 years?

I mean, you can't use 2020 numbers for anything really. Low wage workers got fired at disproportionately higher rates than higher wage workers, which drove the median upwards. But that wasn't people getting raises; it was people getting fired.

Pre-pandemic under Trump, wage growth was pretty good at about 1.3% annualized. But still markedly slower than the last few years under Obama where it was about 1.7%. And in the last 2 years after the pandemic job numbers stabilized, Real wage growth has been 1.2% under Biden, yet people aren't happy.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Mathgod

When you balloon the national deficit like Trump did, you're basically withdrawing from the future to make things better now. It's not sustainable long term. Biden couldn't reverse the Trump tax cuts for the rich, which is why deficits continue to be high. Also, investments in infrastructure and climate action were badly needed, and were neglected under Trump.

Trump also slashed environmental regulations across the board and allowed companies to pollute rampantly. Of course removing regulations is economically stimulative, but it comes at a terrible cost.

If we remove the COVID years, for obviously anomalous reasons, the deficit has almost doubled between 2019 and 2024. Trump essentially doubled the deficit during his term and Biden kept the trend going and doubled it during his term.

[Coach]

There's no hard and fast timeline for economic policies to take effect. Especially with crazy externalities like a global pandemic and large-scale war. Anyone giving anytime line more specific than "anywhere from 5-10 years" is lying to your face. This is why blaming anything (good or bad) on a President within a 4 year term limit is pretty dubious unless it's real hardline and direct target policy. 2 years or less IMO, is way too short.


Tariffs are probably one of the fastest acting policies and the immediate cost of that will be felt pretty quickly (ie prices will rise almost immediately), but the actual intended impacts of tightening manufacturing and bringing those jobs back to America after short term pain etc.. is something that's a decade+ in the making. This is why a system like China is able to steer itself so directly because there's not constant infighting for votes and their people have no say in a decades long experiment to squeeze them even tighter than before into being a labour force that is on the same market as the it's outside competitors instead of the people squeezing their worth out of a world-wide corporate conglomerate. This is also why it won't work in America because people will get sick of being poor and change their government before it takes full hold. This is also why the Republican party wants way more control over these elements, including the vote, because they know they will face political upheaval before any of their policies work. And by "work" I mean consolidate everything into a Russian-style oligarchy. Not "work" to make the American people's lives better.

This is also why leans towards things like public healthcare and infrastructure upgrades and overall policy reform never happen because the populace doesn't care about things that are won't be working for them until 10 or 20+ years from now.

IMO a single 8 or 10-year term limit with more functions to vacate the office (like votes of no confidence etc) would probably be a better way to go.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by ThePrince

Interestingly enough, he made no changes to the policies you listed. If the tariffs and tax cuts were so bad for the economy, why didn’t Biden remove them? And how did the economy recover so well if these things were such a detriment?

You do know how laws work? You can't arbitrarily change laws that have been passed previously without creati9ng new law? You have to work under the framework left by the previous guy and then make appropriate changes through the passage of new law. Biden could NOT make changes to the laws put in play himself. Those tax breaks had to expire, which is on the table for the next congress. The tariffs were implemented poorly and needed to be altered through new law. While they were maintained, they were done so for the IRA to be paid for, as opposed to going full Trump and just slapping that on the credit card. The IRA actually used tariffs the way economists suggest rather than just creating a trade war, using them to build capacity in key areas so the local economy can compete and flourish. Therein lies the rub. Trumpist don't understand how these things work and think he did a great thing, failing to understand that he still reduced manufacturing capacity by offshoring more jobs and only driving prices up and causing inflation. There was not benefit to the economy by those tariffs other than to punish China.

[Lanny_McDonald]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

Inflation happened because of COVID and related policy and supply chain issues. The subsequent slowdown of inflation recently is a result of direct action and policy decisions from the US Federal Reserve.

Agreed. But those tariffs were a driver as was the massive tax break heaped on the credit card. Same thing happens every time a huge tax break is put into play.

[ThePrince]

Originally Posted by opendoor

I mean, you can't use 2020 numbers for anything really. Low wage workers got fired at disproportionately higher rates than higher wage workers, which drove the median upwards. But that wasn't people getting raises; it was people getting fired.

Pre-pandemic under Trump, wage growth was pretty good at about 1.3% annualized. But still markedly slower than the last few years under Obama where it was about 1.7%. And in the last 2 years after the pandemic job numbers stabilized, Real wage growth has been 1.2% under Biden, yet people aren't happy.

Well this is just false, if you look at the federal reserve data.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/MEHOINUSA672N

[Mathgod]

Originally Posted by calgarygeologist

If we remove the COVID years, for obviously anomalous reasons, the deficit has almost doubled between 2019 and 2024. Trump essentially doubled the deficit during his term and Biden kept the trend going and doubled it during his term.

Again, Trump's tax cuts for the rich couldn't be removed because of Manchin/Sinema, so the rich have continued to pay far less in taxes than they did during the Obama years. Then Biden had to make big investments in areas that Trump neglected during his term. Plus, government budgets grew because everything became more expensive in general, and the rise in interest rates made debt servicing more expensive.

One other thing, let us not forget the oil deal that Trump made with the Saudis and the Russians in 2020 to artificially cut supply and raise the price of oil. Was a big contributor to inflation. It was a 2 year deal that Biden couldn't cancel when he took office.

[Strange Brew]

Originally Posted by MegaErtz

There's just no path to victory if Harris loses any one of Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.

Originally Posted by Lanny_McDonald

Not accurate in any shape or fashion. There are many roads to 270 either way. There are so many states in play right now that it could be really close or a blow out either way.

No that is a very accurate statement. I don't pretend to know who is going to win but almost zero chance the Dems in if they lose one of those States.

Losing Michigan but winning say Georgia or NC seems very unlikely. If the Dems win Georgia or NC, seems almost a certainty they win Michigan and Wisconsin.