Watch out. Talking good about trump might get some of these feathers ruffled.
What just happened in the market?
- Thread starter jethreauxdawg
- Start date
- Status
I'm sure you would. Would you rather we pump some more money into the economy and push those overly high p/e ratios even higher?
you could argue tanking the market was part of the negotiation and not necessarily a terrible thing. Market corrections are good especially when its so inflated.
I honestly don't know how farmers deal with all the things they have no control over that could bring an economic windfall or a financial disaster.
Nah man running up so much debt that we can't pay it and then getting mad about cutting stupid spending is way better than doing something different.
Do i need sarcasteriks?
No we are in debt b/c we think we can tax people and spend on whatever we want.
We spend too much. Its been proven. We should start taxing less in about 5 to 10 years if we do the smart thing but we wont.
Cynical side of me says this is what's going on. Optimistic side hopes that 4D genius backed his way into better trade agreements between us and most everyone but China. I don't want my cynicism to prove right on this one. It will mean a very painful future for the American economy.
It's 18-D chess. If you want to know what's going on, read Catturd on X or the Hodge Twins. They're the smartest, most well-read people I know discussing politics and the economy.
Who really knows what's going on? Trump's first term was fine but he didn't promote some radical economic agenda. He also spent bigly and drove up the debt and deficit. But , there's really no major constituency for debt reduction today because the biggest drivers are social security and Medicare. We'll need a crisis before anyone does anything about it. And to think we had a surplus on Sept 10, 2001 and the national debt was $5 trillion and declining.
Dems seem pretty inept. I watched Sen Schumer and Hironi on the news complain about tariffs while the stock ticker showed market increases. What a couple of genuine duds as leaders of the opposition. No wonder Dems lost. And Dems pretty much handpicked Kamala, a genuinely weak candidate, to oppose Trump.
And look at what you ideologically-driven bastards did by opening the border to anyone claiming asylum, telling us to learn new pronouns, claiming a woman can have hairy testicles and that kids should get their genitals cut off in the name of gender affirming care, letting crime run rampant in cities, wanting to defund the police and claiming America is a white supremacist hellhole. That's how we ended up going back to Trump, America and the world's crazy ex-girlfriend. Buckle up. He ain't gonna suddenly start behaving differently
I genuinely prefer my political leaders to run the country quietly and without fanfare. I don't need someone insulting the opposition or doing crazy things to feel good about myself or laugh and say go get 'em. Anyone center left or center right not doing crazy shite economically or culturally is generally fine with me.
So let me get this straight - the low gas prices under Trump were due to Obama and the high gas prices under Biden were due to Trump? Do I have that right?
I would imagine it comes down to what he thought he could get away with without congress. Did you see how people lost their mind over USAID?
Definitely drops in the bucket but there is plenty there to cut if people would get on board.
Holy shat, you are creating an argument that rationalizes a president tanking markets.
That is not an acceptable thing for a president to do.
well the results speak for themselves up to this point.
term one his foreign record and economic record was phenomenal.
maybe we can wait and judge in him in a year or two on term 2? or did you just now start worrying about inflation?
there are plenty of "MAGAs" who dont want "protectionism".
I want free trade up to the point it doesnt affect national security. China affects national security.
Frankly, I'm tired of you people that think only one side of a P&L is important. It's made quite a career for two political parties hell bent on ignoring reality. You must manage both side of the equation. Endless spending isn't the answer just like trickle down piss on my head and tell me it's raining isn't either. But it's the answer that most people don't want to hear so politicians have made off handsomely taking advantage of that fact.
Democrats don't want to upset people that rely on government spending. Republicans don't want to upset the billionaire class with taxes to pay for their commitments and are now saying we even need some pain in our lives to make things better. I'm tired of people telling me they either need more government to make their lives better and rich people telling me it has no role whatsoever because they might have to settle for a Viking 72 instead of the 90 if we want a balanced budget around here.
Of course I will. Just like I'll admit I was wrong about Chris Lemonis if he turns it around and wins another national title this June.
Chest beating, boat rocking, temporary uncertainty, declared victories, and back to the status quo economically.
So please give an objective measure for success. I'm not talking about a 30% year over year rise in GDP. Something realistic. Like real wages rising 5-10% for the middle class like they did in his first term (it was 9% until the pandemic hit)
Are you saying that unless Lemonis wins another natty he is a failure? I know it isn't going to happen now but what of we hosted a Super? I would think that would be successful. Or are you setting the bar so high you won't give Trump any credit at all?
Kamala Harris Has More Billionaires Prominently Backing Her Than Trump—Bezos And Griffin Weigh In (Updated)
"Even though I have plenty of disagreements with their platform...I am voting for Kamala Harris and Tim Walz," Schwarzenegger, the former Republican governor of California, wrote Wednesday.
www.forbes.com
What's your point? We think Kamala/Dems were going trickle down and support lower taxes for the wealthy? Much more likely it was to avoid the exact chaos we've seen this week and leading up to it. Billionaires like 2 things along with their money: 1) predictability in the markets and 2) convincing people they shouldn't pay high taxes so they can give us schmucks better lives. Some advancing to a third more recently: "you schmucks should sacrifice for a better future".Kamala Harris Has More Billionaires Prominently Backing Her Than Trump—Bezos And Griffin Weigh In (Updated)
"Even though I have plenty of disagreements with their platform...I am voting for Kamala Harris and Tim Walz," Schwarzenegger, the former Republican governor of California, wrote Wednesday.
What about a president who is a walking corpse?
what about one who creates artificiall Inflated markets?
fixing trade and national security issues are 100% acceptable for the president to do.
I don’t give a $h1t about upsetting the billionaire class.
but it’s a fact they pay the overwhelming majority of taxes in this country. FACT.
they also invest a ton of money. Investment drives growth.
I don’t want zero taxes. But the government has plenty of 17ing money right now. They need less and they need to be more efficient.
I can prove that. If even $1 goes to something like DEI overseas or trans oversees, it’s $1 too much. I could make that argument for in the country as well.
how about EBT? I’m not saying it’s not NEEDED but it should be a NEED. Cokes, chips, sweets, etc aren’t needs.
we could be so much more transparent about where the money goes but they don’t want transparency bc if they had it, they’d look like crooks BOTH SIDES.
Last edited:
Bud, you justified a president intentionally crash markets.
There is no whataboutism that brings you back from such an insane justification.
The only response from you should be 'yeah, that was dumb. A president clearly has no right or power to intentionally crash markets'.
So why not wait until he’s in office for maybe at least 6 months?
I didn’t hear any of you blaming Biden for inflation did i?
Maybe we were due for a market correction...but are you really saying you think POTUS should intentionally take steps to cause one? The President shouldn't even have that type of power, and if he does he sure shouldn't use it.
Sure there are but like you blame others for tou can only see what you want to see.
I’ll wait on your “yeah Biden was a walking dead man who drove up inflation”.
until then you are still a moron.
The market dropping wasn’t the cause. It was the reaction. All presidents do things that have positive and negative consequences.
do I think or want trump or any president to tank the market? No. Do I care about a some short term pain for long term positives? No.
I mean I loved my investment growth under Biden, but long term it wasn’t good for markets and the USA.
Keep pressure on China while letting the remainder of the world to know he's serious and allowing them time to hammer out new trade agreements. That seems reasonable.
All those things make great boogeymen, but they're a drop in the bucket. That stuff should absolutely be cut, but it won't make a dent. They have to cut things like Medicare and military spending. Nobody in office now is going to do that, though, because it is guaranteed to get them voted out of office.
If you think that Biden is only responsible for inflation then you’re being biased. Not surprising.
I would argue that tanking the market as part of the negotiation would be a monumentally dumbass thing to do.....so you might be on to something.....
Edited to add - that would not be a market correction, as market corrections are driven by, well the market - not tomfoolery.
Last edited:
Perhaps. But why not just apply tariffs to China and tell the rest of the world 'you have 90s days to figure out how to balance out trade with he US or you will be tariffed like I just did to China'?
That accomplishes the same thing you are claiming he was trying to accomplish here.
Further, if dozens of countries had already come to him to bend the knee, then why give them more time to hammer out new agreements? They are already at the negotiation table per Trump.
Why delay it?
I didn’t say Biden was the only person responsible. But I didn’t hear some of these libs hammering him on it.
sorry I’m not gonna listen to them whine after 90 days of trump when’s he’s trying to actually do something that is good for America.
They may be willing to do some of that cutting if we expose enough BS.
I’m ok with cutting some defense.
as a matter of fact I think we should cut 1 to 2% across the board at a minimum in every department. YEARLY until revenue exceeds expenses to an amount that can affect the debt significantly.
id even be willing to have a small tax raise if there was a guarantee that cuts would happen.
Every department has fraud and waste. Every one of them. They are too big not to.
- Status