S&P reached a record high in January

[BigRedBuster]

5 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

As far as I can tell (looking at mobile site) it doesn’t adjust for inflation. 

 

By my calc the rate of increase for the Feb ‘18 to Oct ‘18 jump is 0.0857 and the rate or increase for the Oct ‘15 - Nov ‘16 jump is 0.0769.

 

But the consumer price index is higher now than it was in ‘16. 

 

If we ignore all other variables and assume wages are based only on taxes, and if we pretend it makes sense to look at itty bitty points in time for wage growth, the difference is still not worth the debt the country is racking up. 

That's why it's important for the Feds to keep inflation down....and it pisses off Trump whose an idiot.

 

 

 

3 minutes ago, FrankWheeler said:

 

Not my chart.  You mean October/November 2016?

Both peaks are at 3.9 and are the highest since 08.

 

[FrankWheeler]

So with all that said, technically wages 'are rising faster now than they have prior to the tax cuts' but that's only because they dipped right before it?  Based on the chart it looks like they were well on their way to rebounding to those pre-2008 numbers even before the tax cut.

[HuskerNBigD]

On 12/20/2018 at 12:56 PM, ZRod said:

I may be wrong, but I believe that article is 10 years old...

 

And yet, people still give it +1s.

 

On 12/20/2018 at 1:00 PM, VectorVictor said:

 

Yeah, I don't know where the whole Truck/SUV demand thing came from, but if the economy tanks, those are the first vehicles to go because they cost more to own and maintain. In 2008, there was a severe glut of SUVs and large Truck--I know because we got our first large SUV during that economic collapse for ~35% less than what it originally was marketed for. 

 

Instead, we're seeing a huge demand for the vehicles described in the Reuters piece. It's why Tesla has been successful (in spite of production woes), Toyota is successful, and why you're starting to see European manufacturers (e.g Volkswagen, BMW) retooling assembly lines to put out EVs. 

 

If anything, we're seeing a transition period in the industry, where light vehicles are slowly, but surely, being replaced by electric ones. As the infrastructure improves for EVs, the sales will increase. 

 

Edit: Source is somewhat biased, but the info is legit re: transitioning small vehicles to EV

 

https://cleantechnica.com/2018/12/05/volkswagen-phasing-out-conventional-vehicles-may-build-cars-at-ford-factories-in-us/

This has been my thought too. The car makers are making big bets as the economy gets long in the tooth and could completely backfire. Not to mention, if you analyze average life of cars on the road today, it is one of the oldest in quite some time. 

[HuskerNBigD]

2 hours ago, RedDenver said:

No, we're pointing out the stupidity of these blowhards and of the ridiculous economic arguments they make. If they were just random people shouting on a street corner or on the internet, then I'd agree with you. But this is the President of the United States and the Republican politicians who are currently in control of both Houses of Congress.

 

Simply ignoring these words and actions is how we ended up repeating the same mistakes. As pointed out, trickle down economic ideas continue to abound despite them failing spectacularly at every level.

No they're not.

 

Edit: Reading is hard. Missed the word, currently.

[BigRedBuster]

38 minutes ago, FrankWheeler said:

So with all that said, technically wages 'are rising faster now than they have prior to the tax cuts' but that's only because they dipped right before it?  Based on the chart it looks like they were well on their way to rebounding to those pre-2008 numbers even before the tax cut.

 

Didn’t say I was going to defend the tax cuts. Just stating the fact that wages are increasing faster. 

 

Wages are are increasing faster because we are at extremely low unemployment and most segments of the economy are doing well. When those two things happen, wages go up. 

 

We startred building to this point in 2009.

 

now, if the economy stays strong, wages will continue to go up and increased rates. If not, it will flatten out. 

 

Ive said from the beginning that we should have saved tax cuts till when they are actually needed.  

 

Not now. 

[FrankWheeler]

3 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

Didn’t say I was going to defend the tax cuts. Just stating the fact that wages are increasing faster. 

 

Wages are are increasing faster because we are at extremely low unemployment and most segments of the economy are doing well. When those two things happen, wages go up. 

 

We startred building to this point in 2009.

 

now, if the economy stays strong, wages will continue to go up and increased rates. If not, it will flatten out. 

 

Ive said from the beginning that we should have saved tax cuts till when they are actually needed.  

 

Not now. 

 

Ok.  The original post I quoted from didn't say any of this.

[HuskerNBigD]

Up until November, wage growth was not keeping up with inflation. It has been an issue the Fed has dealt with for quite some time. It is one of the reasons they were waiting to hike rates; as unemployment (even prior to Trump) continued to tick downward, there was no increase in wage inflation as one should've expected. 

[Guy Chamberlin]

4 hours ago, ZRod said:

But you see how it looks pretty foolish to reinforce a flash dichotomy, right? You're essentially giving legitimacy to a blowhards unfounded statements. Then he can continue the charade and shift blame to the damn libs.

 

We have to be better than that.

 

I agree with everything you've been saying, and I think a major correction was in the cards regardless. It's just hard taking the high road when Trump and the Republicans will take credit where it's not due, blame the Dems for obstructionism, and all the high road evidence in the world won't budge a base that believes the President is a gift from God. 

 

But I do hate false dichotomies myself and appreciate your vigilance. 

[Moiraine]

49 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

 

I agree with everything you've been saying, and I think a major correction was in the cards regardless. It's just hard taking the high road when Trump and the Republicans will take credit where it's not due, blame the Dems for obstructionism, and all the high road evidence in the world won't budge a base that believes the President is a gift from God. 

 

But I do hate false dichotomies myself and appreciate your vigilance. 

 

 

This is how I feel about. I’m conflicted on not using the s#!tty arguments, but I still feel he needs to be called out using his own arguments against him. Oh, you’re going to take credit for the highwat stock market and lowest Black u employment? Well, when/if they dip/increase I think it should be mentioned because he took credit for them. He should have to own credit for things he brags about when they go bad.

 

We were heading for a recession without Trump, so he won’t have caused it when the numbers get bad but he shouldn’t have taken all the credit when things were good 1 month after his inauguration.

 

All of that said I’m willing to bet his policies sped things up and will make things worse than they would have been. 

[Danny Bateman]

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

Ive said from the beginning that we should have saved tax cuts till when they are actually needed.  

 

Not now. 

 

Believe me when I say I'm no expert in the matter, but as I understand it, the basis of Keynesian economic theory, which Obama favored, is what you're advocating for here:

 

Stimulate the economy when it's weak, with increased government spending and tax cuts. Take advantage of it when it is strong and use the opportunity to pay down debt.

 

Trump obviously came along and spat in the face of all of that. He's hearkened back to Reaganomics for a new generation. Those who are calling it trickle down are correct. It's supply side economics with a new paint job slapped on it. It blows my mind people continue to think this stuff works for the average Joe. Obviously the stock market has been trending downward for the past few months now, growth is slowing and real wages have barely budged (at least as Moiraine has pointed out when comparing wages to inflation). But now corporations have much lower taxes, which they've used mainly for buying back their own stock, and we have a crapload more debt.

 

Very stable geniuses, the lot of them. Very legal & very cool.

[Guy Chamberlin]

Those tax cuts just hit and the deficit soared to heights that conservatives typically blame on Big Government. 

[Danny Bateman]

4 minutes ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

This is how I feel about. I’m conflicted on not using the s#!tty arguments, but I still feel he needs to be called out using his own arguments against him. Oh, you’re going to take credit for the highwat stock market and lowest Black u employment? Well, when/if they dip/increase I think it should be mentioned because he took credit for them. He should have to own credit for things he brags about when they go bad.

 

We were heading for a recession without Trump, so he won’t have caused it when the numbers get bad but he shouldn’t have taken all the credit when things were good 1 month after his inauguration.

  

All of that said I’m willing to bet his policies sped things up and will make things worse than they would have been. 

 

Ironically, from what I have read, I think you got the last bit wrong, sort of.

 

From what I've gathered, I think the tax cuts acted as a big stimulus to help artificially boost the economy along for a year or two longer than it normally would have gone before recession. So ordinarily things may have slowed down and the stock market may have dipped starting earlier, say in late '17 or early this year. Instead it's started in late 2018 and the throes of it may be well into 2019 and 2020.

 

How ironic would it be if Trump's biggest economic achievement wound up delivering a recession to his doorstep when he's trying to run for re-election in a couple years?

[ZRod]

3 hours ago, Moiraine said:

 

 

This is how I feel about. I’m conflicted on not using the s#!tty arguments, but I still feel he needs to be called out using his own arguments against him. Oh, you’re going to take credit for the highwat stock market and lowest Black u employment? Well, when/if they dip/increase I think it should be mentioned because he took credit for them. He should have to own credit for things he brags about when they go bad.

 

We were heading for a recession without Trump, so he won’t have caused it when the numbers get bad but he shouldn’t have taken all the credit when things were good 1 month after his inauguration.

 

All of that said I’m willing to bet his policies sped things up and will make things worse than they would have been. 

He should very much be held accountable, but I think it's important to hold all sides accountable (and I know you agree). There will come a time very soon where the Dems begin bloviating and backtracking on their promises. Both parties should be dragged kicking and screaming to accountability until they are under the people's thumb, not the money's.

[RedDenver]

3 hours ago, ZRod said:

He should very much be held accountable, but I think it's important to hold all sides accountable (and I know you agree). There will come a time very soon where the Dems begin bloviating and backtracking on their promises. Both parties should be dragged kicking and screaming to accountability until they are under the people's thumb, not the money's.

+1000

[HuskerNBigD]

15 hours ago, ZRod said:

He should very much be held accountable, but I think it's important to hold all sides accountable (and I know you agree). There will come a time very soon where the Dems begin bloviating and backtracking on their promises. Both parties should be dragged kicking and screaming to accountability until they are under the people's thumb, not the money's.

 

Goes back to what the Oracle of Omaha has always argued..... Congressional members should have term limits.