45th President of the United States, Donald Trump. (Vol 6)
Discussion
MX5Biologist said:
Gameface said:
He'd be good presidential material actually.
He's everything Trump isn't.
An impressive military record did not help John Kerry, nor Bob Dole, or John McCain.He's everything Trump isn't.
MX5Biologist said:
Gameface said:
He'd be good presidential material actually.
He's everything Trump isn't.
An impressive military record did not help John Kerry, nor Bob Dole, or John McCain.He's everything Trump isn't.
He's clearly got far more integrity, intelligence and decorum than the incumbent.
Interesting take on the Cohen revelation and the reaction to it:
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/108612568819151...
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/108612568819151...
About that government shutdown. Nasty as it is for the employees involved there may yet be a silver lining due to the dataset it is going to produce, which is a verifiable example of the fiscal multipliers from government spending.
So far JP Morgan have downgraded their growth estimate from 2.25% to 2.0% for the first quarter, their CEO Jamie Dimon has claimed that if the shutdown continues in to March it could turn GDP negative and that calculation has been confirmed by Ian Shepherdson of Pantheon Macroeconomics.
AIUI much of this understanding is derived from data gathered during the 2013 shutdown that showed how the major economic impact wasn't on the individual employees but the secondary effects on 1) coffee shops, gas stations, sandwich bars etc where those employees would spend their money, 2) businesses who rely on those government services for permits, reports, through traffic from national parks or whatever other services the furloughed employees were offering.
Back in 2013 this was new research by, among others, Constantine Yannelis of the University of Chicago so this time round economists already know what to look for and where to gather data. The length of the current shutdown means we are going to end up with a huge dataset showing the secondary and tertiary impact of government spending.
Why is this important? If you've lived through any election anywhere you'll be familiar with the argument that a government should tax less and spend less. In some cases this may be correct and in other cases it may be complete bunkum that leaves everybody poorer, however unless we have data to work from then no one really knows and fiscal multipliers are notoriously difficult to gather data on. What Trump is gifting us economists is a real life example of what happens when you cut government down to its bare bones and get rid of all those 'useless paper pushers'. Apparently GDP drops like a stone.
This isn't an argument for or against big government, it's an argument for calling out anybody who pushes policies based on dogma and conformation bias rather than data, which is unfortunately the vast majority of the political and media world.
So far JP Morgan have downgraded their growth estimate from 2.25% to 2.0% for the first quarter, their CEO Jamie Dimon has claimed that if the shutdown continues in to March it could turn GDP negative and that calculation has been confirmed by Ian Shepherdson of Pantheon Macroeconomics.
AIUI much of this understanding is derived from data gathered during the 2013 shutdown that showed how the major economic impact wasn't on the individual employees but the secondary effects on 1) coffee shops, gas stations, sandwich bars etc where those employees would spend their money, 2) businesses who rely on those government services for permits, reports, through traffic from national parks or whatever other services the furloughed employees were offering.
Back in 2013 this was new research by, among others, Constantine Yannelis of the University of Chicago so this time round economists already know what to look for and where to gather data. The length of the current shutdown means we are going to end up with a huge dataset showing the secondary and tertiary impact of government spending.
Why is this important? If you've lived through any election anywhere you'll be familiar with the argument that a government should tax less and spend less. In some cases this may be correct and in other cases it may be complete bunkum that leaves everybody poorer, however unless we have data to work from then no one really knows and fiscal multipliers are notoriously difficult to gather data on. What Trump is gifting us economists is a real life example of what happens when you cut government down to its bare bones and get rid of all those 'useless paper pushers'. Apparently GDP drops like a stone.
This isn't an argument for or against big government, it's an argument for calling out anybody who pushes policies based on dogma and conformation bias rather than data, which is unfortunately the vast majority of the political and media world.
Tartan Pixie said:
This isn't an argument for or against big government, it's an argument for calling out anybody who pushes policies based on dogma and conformation bias rather than data, which is unfortunately the vast majority of the political and media world.
Anyone who's lived through a real recession knows that it's govt spending that gets the economy back on track. In the 2008/9 GFC/Credit Crunch it was due to spending that the Australian economy recovered as fast as it did rather than dragging on like many European economies. As much as they tried to deride it at the time, Kevin Rudd's $900 bonus actually did a lot of good in the long run. My position on government spending is that the government should spend, on things that have a return. Not necessarily a financial return but a benefit to society. Education for example, is an investment that pays dividends in the future. OTOH, the government shouldn't be profligate either.
Tartan Pixie said:
About that government shutdown. Nasty as it is for the employees involved there may yet be a silver lining due to the dataset it is going to produce, which is a verifiable example of the fiscal multipliers from government spending.
So far JP Morgan have downgraded their growth estimate from 2.25% to 2.0% for the first quarter, their CEO Jamie Dimon has claimed that if the shutdown continues in to March it could turn GDP negative and that calculation has been confirmed by Ian Shepherdson of Pantheon Macroeconomics.
AIUI much of this understanding is derived from data gathered during the 2013 shutdown that showed how the major economic impact wasn't on the individual employees but the secondary effects on 1) coffee shops, gas stations, sandwich bars etc where those employees would spend their money, 2) businesses who rely on those government services for permits, reports, through traffic from national parks or whatever other services the furloughed employees were offering.
Back in 2013 this was new research by, among others, Constantine Yannelis of the University of Chicago so this time round economists already know what to look for and where to gather data. The length of the current shutdown means we are going to end up with a huge dataset showing the secondary and tertiary impact of government spending.
Why is this important? If you've lived through any election anywhere you'll be familiar with the argument that a government should tax less and spend less. In some cases this may be correct and in other cases it may be complete bunkum that leaves everybody poorer, however unless we have data to work from then no one really knows and fiscal multipliers are notoriously difficult to gather data on. What Trump is gifting us economists is a real life example of what happens when you cut government down to its bare bones and get rid of all those 'useless paper pushers'. Apparently GDP drops like a stone.
This isn't an argument for or against big government, it's an argument for calling out anybody who pushes policies based on dogma and conformation bias rather than data, which is unfortunately the vast majority of the political and media world.
And there was I thinking I was the only economist out there salivating at the analytical opportunities the shutdown will offer .........So far JP Morgan have downgraded their growth estimate from 2.25% to 2.0% for the first quarter, their CEO Jamie Dimon has claimed that if the shutdown continues in to March it could turn GDP negative and that calculation has been confirmed by Ian Shepherdson of Pantheon Macroeconomics.
AIUI much of this understanding is derived from data gathered during the 2013 shutdown that showed how the major economic impact wasn't on the individual employees but the secondary effects on 1) coffee shops, gas stations, sandwich bars etc where those employees would spend their money, 2) businesses who rely on those government services for permits, reports, through traffic from national parks or whatever other services the furloughed employees were offering.
Back in 2013 this was new research by, among others, Constantine Yannelis of the University of Chicago so this time round economists already know what to look for and where to gather data. The length of the current shutdown means we are going to end up with a huge dataset showing the secondary and tertiary impact of government spending.
Why is this important? If you've lived through any election anywhere you'll be familiar with the argument that a government should tax less and spend less. In some cases this may be correct and in other cases it may be complete bunkum that leaves everybody poorer, however unless we have data to work from then no one really knows and fiscal multipliers are notoriously difficult to gather data on. What Trump is gifting us economists is a real life example of what happens when you cut government down to its bare bones and get rid of all those 'useless paper pushers'. Apparently GDP drops like a stone.
This isn't an argument for or against big government, it's an argument for calling out anybody who pushes policies based on dogma and conformation bias rather than data, which is unfortunately the vast majority of the political and media world.
captain_cynic said:
Sensible stuff.
Agreed and I think the data that's going to come out of this shutdown is going to be very helpful in understanding what returns we get on which bits of government spending.longblackcoat said:
And there was I thinking I was the only economist out there salivating at the analytical opportunities the shutdown will offer .........
Judging by the way JP Morgan seem to be all over this one I suspect there may be a few of us 
minimoog said:
Interesting take on the Cohen revelation and the reaction to it:
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/108612568819151...
I did post earlier that I found it strange some of the timinghttps://threadreaderapp.com/thread/108612568819151...
Byker28i said:
Which lends the thought - where did Buzzfeed get the story. We know that Mueller’s team doesn’t leak anything unless Mueller strategically wants it leaked.
Also, how did Klobucher know to ask this and trap Barr into that answer. She knew something, or was asked to ask this?
Edit- those questions being:Also, how did Klobucher know to ask this and trap Barr into that answer. She knew something, or was asked to ask this?
Klobuchar: "A president persuading a person to commit perjury would be obstruction. Is that right?"
Barr: "Yes."
Klobuchar: "You also said that a president — or any person — convincing a witness to change testimony would be obstruction. Is that right?"
Barr: "Yes."
https://twitter.com/i/status/1086114743922905089
Edited by Byker28i on Friday 18th January 14:34
paulguitar said:
Yes, yes, this is real.......
Jacob Wohl has been responding to lots of Trump's tweets today.He needs locking up in a padded cell. He's off his rocker.
He says George Soros personally funds migrant caravans to subvert the USA.
He says there's proof of Soros handing out credit cards to illegal immigrants at the border.
Gameface said:
paulguitar said:
Yes, yes, this is real.......
Jacob Wohl has been responding to lots of Trump's tweets today.He needs locking up in a padded cell. He's off his rocker.
He says George Soros personally funds migrant caravans to subvert the USA.
He says there's proof of Soros handing out credit cards to illegal immigrants at the border.
The Democratic National Committee alleges it was among the intended victims of a widespread cyberattack that was detected days after the 2018 midterm elections, according to court documents filed overnight.
"Therefore, it is probable that Russian intelligence again attempted to unlawfully infiltrate DNC computers in November 2018"
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/dnc-alleges-target...
"Therefore, it is probable that Russian intelligence again attempted to unlawfully infiltrate DNC computers in November 2018"
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/dnc-alleges-target...
Nice - another threat to Cohens father in law - more witness intimidation to add to the charge sheet
I think he's upset about Cohen, yet Michael Cohen is not a source for the story. Investigators learned from witnesses in the Trump Organization about Trump directing Cohen to lie to Congress long before they approached Cohen about it. They also have it all fully documented as evidence, tapes, emails etc
I think he's upset about Cohen, yet Michael Cohen is not a source for the story. Investigators learned from witnesses in the Trump Organization about Trump directing Cohen to lie to Congress long before they approached Cohen about it. They also have it all fully documented as evidence, tapes, emails etc
Deja Vu on the prayer mats anyone - roll out the same old lie from 2014...
https://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2014/o...
https://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2014/o...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff