Trump economy not going gangbusters

1. 'Obama years' ... was coming off a historic Great Recession, not a very good comparison.

True. Obama's achievement came in the face of incredible challenges -- he inherited an economy in free-fall, a record deficit, and vastly expensive quagmires in Iraq and Afghanistan. Trump, by comparison, inherited an economy where the fundamentals were as strong as they'd been in a long time. That's part of why this economy has been so disappointing -- we were set for so much better.

3. The proletarians will be forced to pay for it. I don't see it as that big a deal?
Is that a question?
 
black,Hispanic. also women are doing well .adults without a college degree, allbetter off
Manufacturing coming back.

AND the rest of what I posted -so what's the beef?

Do you think those groups have record unemployment lows?
 
It's not a "win/win" if by that you mean something with no losers. As previously discussed, there are multiple losers -- pretty much everyone at or below their level on the career ladder loses, when they come in and create top-down downward pressure on incomes. Their source countries also lose with that poaching, since they invested in their education and then lose their productivity. Who wins? Well, the ownership class wins. One thing the ownership has traditionally been pretty bad at is suppressing the incomes of the upper-middle and lower-upper class. Even as the ownership class succeeded in stagnating wages for decades at the median level and below, they had to deal with the uppity strivers in that 70th-90th percentile range having some leverage to demand decent incomes, keeping the elite from pulling away from them as fast as the elite was able to pull away form the rest of the country. H1Bs are a solution to that "problem." It puts highly educated, high-skills American workers in their place, as far as the ownership class is concerned. It sends a message that they're fungible and if they demand even a small cut of America's increase in wealth, they'll simply be replaced by their off-brand foreign equivalents.

I agree completely with this viewpoint.
You can see how the Ownership Class/Shareholding Class would benefit.

It depends where you are at on the economic totem pole.
 
True. Obama's achievement came in the face of incredible challenges -- he inherited an economy in free-fall, a record deficit, and vastly expensive quagmires in Iraq and Afghanistan. Trump, by comparison, inherited an economy where the fundamentals were as strong as they'd been in a long time. That's part of why this economy has been so disappointing -- we were set for so much better.


Is that a question?


Oneuli: "Is that a question?"
Jack: No. Statement.
 
It’s disappointing because the tax cuts were suppose to increase the GDP to 4-6% according to Trump.

Obama's $787 billion stimulus was supposed to keep unemployment below 8%. We both know it failed immediately and unemployment went to 10%, much higher on local levels.
 
"Yes, stocks are up. But 80 percent of the value is held by the richest 10 percent."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/post...-top-10/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.912e1d809fed

"March 2, 2017"
"In a recent piece for this page, I focused on how well the stock market’s been doing since President Trump was elected. Although explaining market movements is a bit of a fool’s game, especially as bull can turn to bear awfully quickly, I asserted that there’s something rational going on. Market participants are bullish on Trump because they believe that, despite some rhetoric about helping the middle class, he’ll cut taxes for the wealthy and for corporations, cut back on market oversight, and spend more on defense."

This is from more than a year ago. The '10%' are doing well.
 
Back
Top