Thank you President Trump. The economy just keeps choogling along...

[Swordsmyth]

I think any tariff that encourages and protects domestic business runs the risk of propping them up. It may help the business or special interest, but it's at the expense of the consumer and ultimately the marketplace. I don't think any businesses or industries are too big to fail. Even if it meant unemployment in the short term, in the long run it makes a freer, more prosperous market.

I'm not bit picky about it though, and Trump's tariffs aren't making me lose any sleep at night. But I don't think it has helped in the short run or the long run. I'll stick with my original point in this thread that if we start giving credit to the actions and regulations of central planners for a good economy, then that gives them license to be active and regulate. I'd rather them be passive. (Don't know if I said that right, but you know what I mean.)

You are absolutely right in the absence of foreign government intervention, the only other considerations are that moderate uniform tariffs are a better form of taxation than other taxes and that some industries are strategically important to maintain independence.

[enhanced_deficit]

Calvin Coolidge is generally regarded as the most "libertarian" president the country has ever seen.

Coolidge also signed the Immigration Act of 1924, which greatly restricted immigration into the United States.

He probably did not start military interventions/regime changes to cause refugees caravans though unlike Neocon-Libertarians leadership.

MH1BGA

Adelson: Let’s Pass Immigration Reform


Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto awards White House senior adviser Jared Kushner the Order of the Aztec Eagle, the highest Mexican honor awarded to foreigners.

Jared Kushner is taking over efforts to increase legal immigration
Eric Lutz
April 3, 2019
According to Politico, Kushner has been working behind the scenes on a plan to expand some forms of legal immigration in an effort to “increase the number of low- and high-skilled workers” in the country.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019...er-immigration

[eleganz]

You can actually tell, right here in this thread, who clearly hates jobs for Americans and who doesn't.

Trump TDS is a real mental illness that those who suffer from it, cannot control it.

[enhanced_deficit]

Good observation.
But to be fair, since GOP-led Clinton impeachment of 2000, this here may be the second clearest case of jobs hate in recent decades.

[nobody's_hero]

Higher prices means that consumers can afford to buy fewer of ALL GOODS, not just those produced in China. And as was seen in the washing machine tariffs, even US makers raised their prices when the competition had their prices increased. Not just the cost of the directly tariffed goods go up. Steel tariffs raised the costs for automakers who had to raise their prices. Other manufacturers who use steel or aluminum have seen their costs go up.

People who don't have jobs don't buy much of anything. Well, unless they're buying what they can with money given to them in the form of welfare. That of course, hurts people who do have jobs. But F'k the working man, am I right?

And the theory that we get better jobs and outsource the crappy ones is just laughable. Not everyone in the US is going to become space engineers and work in silicon valley jobs. That's right along the lines of liberal thinking that everyone just goes to college and life is good.

[Torgrimson]

You can actually tell, right here in this thread, who uses golf rangefinders daily and who clearly hates jobs for Americans and who doesn't.

Trump TDS is a real mental illness that those who suffer from it, cannot control it.

Honest to goodness, up until recently, I thought TDS was just a joke or a meme, however you want to put it. But I guess it exists.

[oyarde]

I don't agree with his ideas either.

That guy is too crazy to even call those ideas .

[juleswin]

When Obama was reducing the unemployment rate I for some reason did not believe it. I am not exactly sure why I thought it waa as fake but thankfully nobody accused me of having ODS or made a post thanking him for reducing the unemployment rate.

I really don't know what to make of this, I suspect the fundamentals of the economy is still bad. Record homelessness, consumer debts still high, record spending, deficits and just bad indicators all around.

If this lasts then, I will go back and thank Trump and Obama for the miracle they worked on the economy. For the sake of all of us, I hope this miracle is built on a solid foundation.

[devil21]

You can actually tell, right here in this thread, who clearly hates jobs for Americans and who doesn't.

Trump TDS is a real mental illness that those who suffer from it, cannot control it.

I look at "jobs" at a much higher level than most. I want jobs that aren't merely tax generating avenues for governments. "Jobs" as they currently exist aren't anything to get excited about. Wage stagnation, at best, while other costs of living rise and a large chunk of earnings go to government taxation and regulation in various forms. The purpose of "jobs" these days (see: Fed dual mandate) is to sustain the growth of government via taxation and to ensure the bankers receive their slice of those income tax payments from the slaves. Or is it easier to stick with 3rd grade reading level labels and buzzwords instead of looking at the issue critically?

Btw, the "official" jobs numbers are smoke and mirrors. Last month's "job gains" were almost entirely due to the birth/death formula that is plugged into every monthly BLS report, regardless of what the job market actually looked like. If you believe that the unemployment rate really is 4%, you then should also believe that price inflation is less than 2% also. No one seriously believes inflation is less than 2% so why believe other stats? You simply can't believe any of the official stats any more and can only rely on what you witness in your sphere. Job prospects are decent in many Agenda 2030 target cities. Everywhere else, not so much.

[nobody's_hero]

I look at "jobs" at a much higher level than most. I want jobs that aren't merely tax generating avenues for governments. "Jobs" as they currently exist aren't anything to get excited about. Wage stagnation, at best, while other costs of living rise and a large chunk of earnings go to government taxation and regulation in various forms. The purpose of "jobs" these days (see: Fed dual mandate) is to sustain the growth of government via taxation and to ensure the bankers receive their slice of those income tax payments from the slaves. Or is it easier to stick with 3rd grade reading level labels and buzzwords instead of looking at the issue critically?.

You know, I can actually understand that point of view, but I also see joblessness and welfare as a form of slavery. Government wants a dependent class. People who get up at 6:30 in the morning to work an 8-to-5 job and can actually buy their groceries with their own money, well, they have skin in the game. They have something to be proud of, even if it is a crappy job cleaning toilets at a truck stop—there is at least more honor in it than sitting at home watching daytime TV and spamming trips to the mailbox looking for a check they didn't earn.

When the majority of people realize they don't actually have to work for a living, we're going to see a real implosion of the economy. I guarantee you people are going to be worried about a lot more than a washing machine costing a few bucks more when that happens. Hell they're already adopting UBI in cities here in the USA, where people literally get a paycheck just for exchanging oxygen for carbon-dioxide. Hell, I can do that, I'll vote for whatever, so where's my money?

Believe me, you want people to work. You want them to have a dog in the fight. I can definitely see it the way you put it, but I also see it my way, and between the two, I've made my choice.

[Anti Federalist]

You know, I can actually understand that point of view, but I also see joblessness and welfare as a form of slavery. Government wants a dependent class. People who get up at 6:30 in the morning to work an 8-to-5 job and can actually buy their groceries with their own money, well, they have skin in the game. They have something to be proud of, even if it is a crappy job cleaning toilets at a truck stop—there is at least more honor in it than sitting at home watching daytime TV and spamming trips to the mailbox looking for a check they didn't earn.

When the majority of people realize they don't actually have to work for a living, we're going to see a real implosion of the economy. I guarantee you people are going to be worried about a lot more than a washing machine costing a few bucks more when that happens. Hell they're already adopting UBI in cities here in the USA, where people literally get a paycheck just for exchanging oxygen for carbon-dioxide. Hell, I can do that, I'll vote for whatever, so where's my money?

Believe me, you want people to work. You want them to have a dog in the fight. I can definitely see it the way you put it, but I also see it my way, and between the two, I've made my choice.

Owe you a rep.

[kcchiefs6465]

@Anti Federalist

Trump backs off Jones Act waiver for gas tankers [16 Hours Ago]

President Trump’s flirtation with allowing a Jones Act exemption for foreign flag tankers to carry liquefied natural gas between U.S. ports brought Republican senators to the White House, where they said the President changed his mind.

After reports that administration was considering a 10-year waiver of Jones Act requirements to allow those LNG shipments to Puerto Rico and New England, a contingent of Republican lawmaker from the Gulf Coast and Alaska requested an urgent May 1 meeting.

“After talking to President Trump, I am confident that he realizes how important the Jones Act is to Louisiana’s maritime industry and that no changes will be made. I made the case that the livelihood of Louisiana families is at stake,” Sen. John Kennedy, R-Louisiana, said after their White House audience.

“It would be foolish to push aside those jobs in favor of foreign made and foreign crewed ships,” said Kennedy.

It was the latest round in attempts to get around the Merchant Marine Act of 1920 and its requirement that cargoes between U.S. ports be carried on U.S. flagged and crewed vessels. Puerto Rico has been a focus of those efforts in the wake of Hurricane Maria in 2017. The allies this time include a Texas oilman, Puerto Rico officials and libertarian and free-trade groups.

.....

But as they did after calls for a waiver after Hurricane Maria, senators from maritime industry states apparently prevailed, arguing for preserving the Jones Act in line with the administration’s stated policy of protecting and preserving U.S. jobs.

hxxps://workboat.com/news/bluewater/trump-backs-off-jones-act-waiver-for-gas-tankers/

What say you, Sailor?

[Anti Federalist]

What say you, Sailor?

About Jones in general, about Trump flip flopping on the issue, or about the actual carriage of LNG to PR and how to best accomplish that?

[kcchiefs6465]

About Jones in general, about Trump flip flopping on the issue, or about the actual carriage of LNG to PR and how to best accomplish that?

Jones Act in general with regards to creating or maintaining maritime jobs and the implications thereof.

[Anti Federalist]

Jones Act in general with regards to creating or maintaining maritime jobs and the implications thereof.

While generally being in favor of it, of course, due to my own self interests, and consistent with my view that tariffs and restrictions on foreign outfits competing within the US benefit US citizens and the country as whole, I think that the need for it is becoming less evident.

As I tried to point out numerous times to RPF member Elwar, before he got into hot water with Thailand's navy, the sea is now one of the most heavily regulated and closely survielled places on the planet.

Global government has grown and blossomed in the name of safety and seagoing regulations, so much so over that past 20 years, that the benefits of running a "Flag of Convenience" ship really no longer exists.

Regardless of where you flag or homeport a ship these days, you will be held to the same supra-national laws and regulating bodies as every other ship in the world.

Your safety and operational systems must all be the same, your crew training, licensing and qualifications must all be IMO and ILO compliant, these were where you "cut corners" and save substantial money in the past.

The days of hiring a mad Greek Captain, a officer's suite of eastern Europeans and a deck force of greehorn Filipino's willing to work for a dollar a day and bowl of cold rice and rat meat, are over.

The only real cost savings now of using non Jones hulls would be in construction costs (but those are increasing as well, even if you do build your hulls in China or India, which are usually junk, I know, I've sailed more than a few.) or tax savings on overall corporate profits.

That said, the excuse to use PR's situation is a canard.

They get as much LNG as they can handle right now, from Trinidad, cheaper than they could get it from Houston.

[shakey1]

[Zippyjuan]

I look at "jobs" at a much higher level than most. I want jobs that aren't merely tax generating avenues for governments. "Jobs" as they currently exist aren't anything to get excited about. Wage stagnation, at best, while other costs of living rise and a large chunk of earnings go to government taxation and regulation in various forms. The purpose of "jobs" these days (see: Fed dual mandate) is to sustain the growth of government via taxation and to ensure the bankers receive their slice of those income tax payments from the slaves. Or is it easier to stick with 3rd grade reading level labels and buzzwords instead of looking at the issue critically?

Btw, the "official" jobs numbers are smoke and mirrors. Last month's "job gains" were almost entirely due to the birth/death formula that is plugged into every monthly BLS report, regardless of what the job market actually looked like. If you believe that the unemployment rate really is 4%, you then should also believe that price inflation is less than 2% also. No one seriously believes inflation is less than 2% so why believe other stats? You simply can't believe any of the official stats any more and can only rely on what you witness in your sphere. Job prospects are decent in many Agenda 2030 target cities. Everywhere else, not so much.

Birth and death do not count as part of the jobs report. It is a survey of companies who are asked how many jobs they have. Unemployment figures likewise do not figure births or deaths- they survey people and ask them are they working and if not are they looking for work. (they ask additional questions to clarify about their job situation) If they are dead, they are not part of the survey.

[oyarde]

You can actually tell, right here in this thread, who clearly hates jobs for Americans and who doesn't.

Trump TDS is a real mental illness that those who suffer from it, cannot control it.

It is like they do not want to choogle . Pretty unAmerican .

[oyarde]

Plus rep . You are a Great American .

[oyarde]

When Obama was reducing the unemployment rate I for some reason did not believe it. I am not exactly sure why I thought it waa as fake but thankfully nobody accused me of having ODS or made a post thanking him for reducing the unemployment rate.

I really don't know what to make of this, I suspect the fundamentals of the economy is still bad. Record homelessness, consumer debts still high, record spending, deficits and just bad indicators all around.

If this lasts then, I will go back and thank Trump and Obama for the miracle they worked on the economy. For the sake of all of us, I hope this miracle is built on a solid foundation.

I agree that the deficits and spending are bad . I also know there will be no person running who has any chance to be elected that these numbers will not be worse under than they currently are . So any change will bring worse . Gotta enjoy the chooglin' because when it stops it could get bad , which will probably have no effect on me but if will for millions .

[enhanced_deficit]

Bold leadership leveraging his succesful business experience, big deficit spending paying dividends since raising debt limit. His bold managment of his businesses had also created jobs boom during early years of debt spending boost, hopefully national creditorss won't create the fuss like his business creditors did and allow critics to call it a 'sugar high' boom down the road.

Thanks are also due to Deep State for not allowing Mueller to stop MAGA POTUS from continuing with America-First agenda

Thank You Deep State !



Poll: Do you believe economic data is manipulated for political agenda?


19 times Trump called jobs numbers ‘fake’


The US economy is coming down from a sugar high. How bad will the headache be?
March 28, 2019
https://qz.com/1583024/us-gdp-growth...igh-wears-off/

Coincidence that Deep State suddenly leaked this MAGA biz mgmt detail to media in the middle of this debate on his spending debt handling?
Top headline on nbcnews now.

Trump tax returns from 1985-1994 reportedly show $1 billion in losses

[Swordsmyth]

Coincidence that Deep State suddenly leaked this MAGA biz mgmt detail to media in the middle of this debate on his spending debt handling?
Top headline on nbcnews now.

Trump tax returns from 1985-1994 reportedly show $1 billion in losses

Another nothing burger:




Every year from 1985 through 1994, according to leaked tax returns obtained by The New York Times, Donald J. Trump reported a negative adjusted gross income on his tax returns. That number grew as new losses were combined with those from prior years. The New York Times previously found that Mr. Trump declared an adjusted gross income in 1995 of negative $915.7 million.

The figures, according to the Times, show that the losses contradict the image that Trump promoted of himself as an adept and successful New York real estate developer.
Or do they show an adept real estate developer following the tax law's depreciation guidelines to minimize his tax liabilities like every good shepherd of capital should?

“I love depreciation,” Mr. Trump said during a presidential debate in 2016.

As NYT openly admits:

Some fraction of that ocean of red ink represented depreciation on Mr. Trump’s real estate. One of the most valuable special benefits in the tax code, depreciation lets owners of commercial real estate write down the cost of their buildings.

The Times still gloats:

Over all, Mr. Trump lost so much money that he was able to avoid paying income taxes for eight of the 10 years. It is not known whether the I.R.S. later required changes after audits.

The newly-leaked documents, reportedly confirm the details that were leaked in October 2018, where the NYT accused President Trump of participating in "questionable" and "dubious" tax strategies "including instances of outright fraud" that greatly increased the fortune he received from his parents and allowed him to accrue millions of dollars in additional wealth from his father's real estate empire "much of it through tax dodges in the 1990s."
As one of the authors, NYT reporter Susanne Craig explained at the time, she and Russ Buettner, David Barstow "got our hands on a massive trove of confidential docs - including 200 tax returns - from Fred Trump’s empire. We found Donald Trump received hundreds of millions from his dad, some of it via fraudulent tax schemes."
But, as NYT reports, several weeks ago, a senior official issued a statement saying:

“The president got massive depreciation and tax shelter because of large-scale construction and subsidized developments. That is why the president has always scoffed at the tax system and said you need to change the tax laws. You can make a large income and not have to pay large amount of taxes.”

On Saturday, after further inquiries from The Times, a lawyer for the president, Charles J. Harder, wrote that the tax information was “demonstrably false,” and that the paper’s statements “about the president’s tax returns and business from 30 years ago are highly inaccurate.”
He cited no specific errors, but on Tuesday added that “I.R.S. transcripts, particularly before the days of electronic filing, are notoriously inaccurate” and “would not be able to provide a reasonable picture of any taxpayer’s return.”
The Times then dangles this open-ended accusatory paragraph:

The new tax information does not answer questions raised by House Democrats in their pursuit of the last six years of Mr. Trump’s tax returns — about his recent business dealings and possible foreign sources of financing and influence. Nor does it offer a fundamentally new narrative of his picaresque career.

And the biggest question, of course is simple - was it illegal?

No!

As the NYT itself admitted after receiving Trump's 1995 tax return form's front-page in October 2016, there was nothing illegal about using such a manoeuvre:

The world's rich take advantage of NOL tax planning all the time, and in fact acquiring corporations for their NOL benefit has long been a strategy in corporate America designed to minimize Federal and State tax outflows.

The tax experts consulted by The Times said nothing in the 1995 documents suggested any wrongdoing by Mr. Trump, even if the extraordinary size of the loss he declared would have probably attracted extra scrutiny from I.R.S. examiners.
“The I.R.S., when they see a negative $916 million, that has to pop out,” Mr. Rosenfeld said.

So why is it a big deal? To make him seem like he avoids taxes? Well, if any other American could do so legally, wouldn't they?
Finally, even the NYTimes admits the ten years of tax returns cover a period of dramatic recession, stock market crash, and real estate collapse, so, as one Twitter wit suggested (@pharaohfire):

"Trump only lost 1 Billion in the worst Real Estate recession in US history outside the Great Depression. To me that’s #winning"

At his nadir, in the post-recession autumn of 1991, Mr. Trump testified before a congressional task force, calling for changes in the tax code to benefit his industry.

“The real estate business — we’re in an absolute depression,” Mr. Trump told the lawmakers, adding:
“I see no sign of any kind of upturn at all. There is no incentive to invest. Everyone is doing badly, everyone.”

“90% of all millionaires become so through owning real estate. More money has been made in real estate than in all industrial investments combined. The wise young man or wage earner of today invests his money in real estate.” -Andrew Carnegie

And one last point for your consideration:

• AMZN market cap: $945BN
  
• Taxes paid in 2018: negative $129MM

While The Times did not obtain the president’s actual tax returns, it received the information contained in the returns from someone who had legal access to it.


https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...85-1994-decade

[r3volution 3.0]

I suppose that someone else (or perhaps myself) has made this point in this thread, but it bears repeating:

The Trump economy is a continuation of the Obama economy and, in both cases, it's a question of growth in spite (not because) of state activity.

[Swordsmyth]

I suppose that someone else (or perhaps myself) has made this point in this thread, but it bears repeating:

The Trump economy is a continuation of the Obama economy and, in both cases, it's a question of growth in spite (not because) of state activity.

LOL

[r3volution 3.0]

LOL

Herp Derp, go read a book (or just look at statistics).

...or don't, doesn't matter; your opinion doesn't matter.

The world will turn just the same either way.

[Anti Federalist]

It is like they do not want to choogle . Pretty unAmerican .

InSiNceRe AmErIcANs

[Swordsmyth]

Herp Derp, go read a book (or just look at statistics).

...or don't, doesn't matter; your opinion doesn't matter.

The world will turn just the same either way.

Trump's policies and O'Bama's are nothing alike and their effect on the economy is not at all the same.

[Zippyjuan]

Trump's policies and O'Bama's are nothing alike and their effect on the economy is not at all the same.

True. Obama didn't try to slow down the economy by imposing tariffs.

[r3volution 3.0]

Trump's policies and O'Bama's are nothing alike and their effect on the economy is not at all the same.

There is virtually no difference between their policies.

Trump's government spends more than Obama's; that's a fact.

His "deregulation" is utterly trivial (as I've demonstrated several times by citing the administration's own data).

Foreign policy hasn't changed (e.g. more troops in Syria than before).

Certainly nothing re due process/PATRIOT Act has changed.

Trump's not an especially bad politician; he's just a normal one - which is to say horrible.

But there's a certain mental illness in the country which prevents people from recognizing this obvious fact, which is what's uniquely problematic.

[Swordsmyth]

True. Obama didn't try to slow down the economy by imposing tariffs.

Fighting back in the trade wars is helping the economy instead of collaborating in hollowing it out.