Biden getting grilled by all of the reporters at this press conference.

[Bowlmania]

Yet Biden has continued them. That may be a worse decision- to continue a policy he knows is detrimental to the economy.

Short on time so quick reply. Your question was name a US president who made a unilateral decision or took an act that affected the economy. I identified the president and described the measure. The Trump-initiated trade war with China negatively impacted the US economy and is widely viewed as a failure, and that was the assessment while Trump was still president. What Biden did or didn't do after the fact doesn't change that.

These tariffs were much easier to impose than to lift. There's been pressure from labor unions and a number of American companies to keep the tariffs in place. At the same time, lifting the tariffs would be perceived as being "weak on China." Also, the tariffs could be used as a bargaining chip for a significant "get" at the appropriate time. Finally, the US economy is currently booming and is the envy of the world. There are 5 million more US jobs now than prior to the pandemic. Wage growth is outpacing inflation. There's no compelling reason to lift the tariffs now.

 

[mcmurtry66]

Carville: Biden not accepting Super Bowl interview is a ‘sign’

Democratic strategist James Carville said President Biden not sitting for an interview before the Super Bowl is a “sign” of his administration having little confidence in him. “It’s the biggest television audience, not even close, and you get a chance to do a 20, 25-minute interview on that day...

www.yahoo.com

 

[ribbont]

Short on time so quick reply. Your question was name a US president who made a unilateral decision or took an act that affected the economy. I identified the president and described the measure. The Trump-initiated trade war with China negatively impacted the US economy and is widely viewed as a failure, and that was the assessment while Trump was still president. What Biden did or didn't do after the fact doesn't change that.

These tariffs were much easier to impose than to lift. There's been pressure from labor unions and a number of American companies to keep the tariffs in place. At the same time, lifting the tariffs would be perceived as being "weak on China." Also, the tariffs could be used as a bargaining chip for a significant "get" at the appropriate time. Finally, the US economy is currently booming and is the envy of the world. There are 5 million more US jobs now than prior to the pandemic. Wage growth is outpacing inflation. There's no compelling reason to lift the tariffs now.

Danc already gave that example and I acknowledged it and stated a debate could be had if it was effective. So, you answered my question late. You should have replied to him about the success of the tariffs.

But since you wanted to prove how bad Trump's decision was, I just wondered why didn't Biden get rid of them on day 1? I mean, that was a 2019 report so Biden was well aware of the poor results. He didn't even reverse the policy during the recession of 2022. Kept it in place.

And like I have posted, Biden is like Archie Miller in that winning 4 games after going 1-13 does not mean things are great.

I am happy about the direction of the economy. Never stated otherwise. I just think there was no reason to go through 2022 to get here. Biden policies were a contributor to that. Not the only one, but a significant one.

 

[TommyCracker]

Danc already gave that example and I acknowledged it and stated a debate could be had if it was effective. So, you answered my question late. You should have replied to him about the success of the tariffs.

But since you wanted to prove how bad Trump's decision was, I just wondered why didn't Biden get rid of them on day 1? I mean, that was a 2019 report so Biden was well aware of the poor results. He didn't even reverse the policy during the recession of 2022. Kept it in place.

And like I have posted, Biden is like Archie Miller in that winning 4 games after going 1-13 does not mean things are great.

I am happy about the direction of the economy. Never stated otherwise. I just think there was no reason to go through 2022 to get here. Biden policies were a contributor to that. Not the only one, but a significant one.

So you disagree with how much Powell has raised interest rates? That was a major factor of what drove the market down in 22. That and inflation, particularly when Russia invaded Ukraine that spring and caused the WTC to spike from the 70s up around $125.

2021 was a great market year. 2022 sucked. 2023 was great and 2024 has started out on fire.

The right tends to excuse Trump for covid and that's fair, but then don't acknowledge it when it comes to Biden (who took over in the middle of it).

That's just partisan hackery.

So if we're going to be hacks than I'm going to go back to how over 90% of job growth in the past 30 years was under Dem presidents, as was the majority of the market growth

So why are we going away from it again, particularly back to the guy who is the worst jobs president since Hoover?

4th time's a charm. ;-)

 

[TommyCracker]

I hate to break it to you but you’re not getting y away with the drive by stuff in the other threads either. You completely disgraced and embarrassed yourself with your bloviating about the Heritage Foundation in the other thread.

Let us dispense with this fantasy that you have more to offer than drive by stuff. You definitely do not.

Drive by stuff is when you don't give a shit to reply back to posters, because those posters are mainly shit posting themselves.

With guys like Ribbont who I know for real, or Murt, or Aloha, or Brad...most of the time they are engaging in good faith and therefore when they direct a post at me or reply to one of mine it's respectful etiquette to acknowledge them.

You're a good poster when you choose to be, but mostly you shit post and then end your posts trying way too hard to get in a personal insult.

 

[TommyCracker]

I hate to break it to you but you’re not getting away with the drive by stuff in the other threads either. You completely disgraced and embarrassed yourself with your bloviating about the Heritage Foundation in the other thread.

Let us dispense with this fantasy that you have more to offer than drive by stuff. You definitely do not.

Oh and folks....read up on project 2025 if you want to know 'the plan'.

Farva is pissed at me bringing it up and wants to downplay it even though his idols (Trump, Vivek and Desantis) are following it to a T.

https://www.project2025.org/

If you don't want to read it (it's 920 something pages) this girl does a good job breaking it down (she's a lib lawyer).

 

[TommyCracker]

You’ve said this before and it’s still wrong. There was only one stock market crash during GWB’s terms, the financial crisis at the end of his administration, and the President had nothing to do with it. That was right after getting the budget deficit down to about $60 billion. The crash blew that up. The dot com crash happened during Clinton’s term. Kind of appropriate because the dot com boom was most responsible for our budget surpluses.

The dot com crash didn't bottom out until October 2002, nearly two years of his term. It started right at the turn with an initial drop, recovered a bit but kept dropping after the election and into 2001.

Then 9/11 happened and it broke again. Obviously I don't 'blame' GWB for the 9/11 crash, just that it crushed the market that was already being crushed. 9/11 definitely imo was it's own market crushing event as it took everything down with it and lingered/bottomed until October of 2002.

Only to get crushed again in 2008.

The 00's was just an awful market stretch (dot com, 9/11 and financial crisis). The NASDAQ (which is my main trading platform) started at 5000 and finished at 1600 when Obama took over in 2009. Almost a 70% loss.

Yikes!

 

[Aloha Hoosier]

The dot com crash didn't bottom out until October 2002, nearly two years of his term. It started right at the turn with an initial drop, recovered a bit but kept dropping after the election and into 2001.

Then 9/11 happened and it broke again. Obviously I don't 'blame' GWB for the 9/11 crash, just that it crushed the market that was already being crushed. 9/11 definitely imo was it's own market crushing event as it took everything down with it and lingered/bottomed until October of 2002.

Only to get crushed again in 2008.

The 00's was just an awful market stretch (dot com, 9/11 and financial crisis). The NASDAQ (which is my main trading platform) started at 5000 and finished at 1600 when Obama took over in 2009. Almost a 70% loss.

Yikes!

One crash. End of his term.

 

[Bowlmania]

Danc already gave that example and I acknowledged it and stated a debate could be had if it was effective. So, you answered my question late. You should have replied to him about the success of the tariffs.

But since you wanted to prove how bad Trump's decision was, I just wondered why didn't Biden get rid of them on day 1? I mean, that was a 2019 report so Biden was well aware of the poor results. He didn't even reverse the policy during the recession of 2022. Kept it in place.

Sorry I was "late" (?) in responding to your question. I spend a fraction of the time here that many other posters do. I'm sure I'm often missing posts that relate (or are responsive) to mine. I don't deliberately blow a good poster off. More often than not, I probably just haven't seen their post.

With respect to danc, he's not a serious poster. He's here mostly to pick fights and shitpost. I rarely (if ever) try to engage him in a substantive discussion.

So back to the topic. Get rid of the tariffs on Day 1? January 20, 2021? In the throes of a pandemic and a country in crisis? I think the administration had bigger fish to fry.

And as for later, I've already discussed the countervailing factors.

No more posting from me today. Busy with some travel, the game and a party (can't stand the "Taygate" reference to Super Bowl parties this year - - ugh). Have fun.

 

[ribbont]

So you disagree with how much Powell has raised interest rates? That was a major factor of what drove the market down in 22. That and inflation, particularly when Russia invaded Ukraine that spring and caused the WTC to spike from the 70s up around $125.

2021 was a great market year. 2022 sucked. 2023 was great and 2024 has started out on fire.

The right tends to excuse Trump for covid and that's fair, but then don't acknowledge it when it comes to Biden (who took over in the middle of it).

That's just partisan hackery.

So if we're going to be hacks than I'm going to go back to how over 90% of job growth in the past 30 years was under Dem presidents, as was the majority of the market growth

So why are we going away from it again, particularly back to the guy who is the worst jobs president since Hoover?

4th time's a charm. ;-)

22 happened because of what happened in 21 and to some extent 20. As you understand, actions relating to the economy don't have immediate impact. So in 20, money supply spiked dramatically from bipartisan action due to covid. And due to the fed and QE. I understood the first relief (CARES) but not entirely the second, the CAA in Dec. I believed at the time it needed to be more targeted.

As an example, retirees did not need stimulus checks. In general, their income was not affected due to covid. Many of my clients brought the checks into me. So, at the time, I didn’t think most retirees needed the Dec 2020 stimulus, that again was bipartisan.

But we needed to let the stimulus flow through the system. Instead, IMHO, Biden with the ARP, poured gas on the fire that was burning fine. Economic growth was improving, jobs were improving, and the pandemic was slowing. In fact, many were calling for the fed to taper QE in 2 and 3Q 21. But the fed did not.

So I believe 22 happened because of rising rates to combat inflation that was caused by 1) oil prices increasing 59% in 21 caused partly by Bidens actions. 2) ARP. 3) QE in place too long and too slow to raise rates 4) global supply chain issues.

I understand you probably think I am being partisan, and I can't change your mind on that I suppose. I just think the Biden admin 1) wanted to do something for the climate crowd and 2) put their stamp on rebounding from covid. If they do nothing and the economy recovers well, then they won't get credit. So, do ARP, and now we can claim we fixed the economy.

But it backfired with inflation and voters remember. Now that all that stimulus is fading away, the economy is humming pretty good. I believe it could have been this way in 22 if not for the CAA, ARP, and earlier tightening. BTW - the admin gets credit for improving supply chain issues, IMO.

Hope you slept well. I am guessing you had a late gig?

Edited for grammar.

 

[mcmurtry66]

22 happened because of what happened in 21 and to some extent 20. As you understand, actions relating to the economy don't have immediate impact. So in 20, money supply spiked dramatically from bipartisan action due to covid. And due to the fed and QE. I understood the first relief (CARES) but not entirely the second, the CAA in Dec. I believed at the time it needed to be more targeted.

As an example, retirees did not need stimulus checks. In general, their income was not affected due to covid. Many of my clients brought the checks into me. So, at the time, I didn’t think most retirees needed the Dec 2020 stimulus, that again was bipartisan.

But we needed to let the stimulus flow through the system. Instead, IMHO, Biden with the ARP, poured gas on the fire that was burning fine. Economic growth was improving, jobs were improving, and the pandemic was slowing. In fact, many were calling for the fed to taper QE in 2 and 3Q 21. But the fed did not.

So I believe 22 happened because of rising rates to combat inflation that was caused by 1) oil prices increasing 59% in 21 caused partly by Bidens actions. 2) ARP. 3) QE in place too long and too slow to raise rates 4) global supply chain issues.

I understand you probably think I am being partisan, and I can't change your mind on that I suppose. I just think the Biden admin 1) wanted to do something for the climate crowd and 2) put their stamp on rebounding from covid. If they do nothing and the economy recovers well, then they won't get credit. So, do ARP, and now we can claim we fixed the economy.

But it backfired with inflation and voters remember. Now that the all that stimulus is fading away, the economy is humming pretty good. I believe it could been this way in 22 if not for the CAA, ARP, and earlier tightening. BTW - the admin gets credit for improving supply chain issues, IMO.

Hope you slept well. I am guessing you had a late gig?

Perfect

 

[DANC]

Oh I've been banned. Twice.

Oh hell, you should be moved into the starting lineup1

 

[DANC]

No, I’m really not.

Congratulations. You're the only person in America who isn't paying at least 50% more for gas than you were before the 2020 election.

 

[TommyCracker]

22 happened because of what happened in 21 and to some extent 20. As you understand, actions relating to the economy don't have immediate impact. So in 20, money supply spiked dramatically from bipartisan action due to covid. And due to the fed and QE. I understood the first relief (CARES) but not entirely the second, the CAA in Dec. I believed at the time it needed to be more targeted.

As an example, retirees did not need stimulus checks. In general, their income was not affected due to covid. Many of my clients brought the checks into me. So, at the time, I didn’t think most retirees needed the Dec 2020 stimulus, that again was bipartisan.

But we needed to let the stimulus flow through the system. Instead, IMHO, Biden with the ARP, poured gas on the fire that was burning fine. Economic growth was improving, jobs were improving, and the pandemic was slowing. In fact, many were calling for the fed to taper QE in 2 and 3Q 21. But the fed did not.

So I believe 22 happened because of rising rates to combat inflation that was caused by 1) oil prices increasing 59% in 21 caused partly by Bidens actions. 2) ARP. 3) QE in place too long and too slow to raise rates 4) global supply chain issues.

I understand you probably think I am being partisan, and I can't change your mind on that I suppose. I just think the Biden admin 1) wanted to do something for the climate crowd and 2) put their stamp on rebounding from covid. If they do nothing and the economy recovers well, then they won't get credit. So, do ARP, and now we can claim we fixed the economy.

But it backfired with inflation and voters remember. Now that all that stimulus is fading away, the economy is humming pretty good. I believe it could have been this way in 22 if not for the CAA, ARP, and earlier tightening. BTW - the admin gets credit for improving supply chain issues, IMO.

Hope you slept well. I am guessing you had a late gig?

Edited for grammar.

Yeah my singer tends to travel for his work so we're pretty much relegated to Saturday nights for gigs (which is more than fine by me at this stage).

It's a nice hobby that pays. There's not many hobbies you can say that about. Funny thing about inflation is there has been none for the grinder, bar band musician. I used to make around $200 playing a place like Jakes in the late 80's (with Redline/Excel after HS in 89) and I made around $200 last night. Bands are still getting between $800 to $1200 from bars.

Think of the deadbeat musicians people!! Lol

Anyway, agree on the more targeted stimulus and good point on the retirees. However we know how much everybody bitches so sending out a targeted stimulus during a health emergency would just be one more thing to bitch about so a flat check was much simpler.

Main counter was I wanted to point out that Putin and the Saudis flooded the market in a fight in the spring of 20, we tend to forget that. That's what caused the WTI to drop significantly, which caused gas prices that many Trumpers points to in their 'we had cheap gas' to drop to 1980 levels. I believe the WTI got into the $20's for a moment.

In normal times in the past 10 years it hovers in the 70's and 80's. It was going to always get back to that.

It's currently $76.84, back at its normalized level.

Crude Oil Prices - 70 Year Historical Chart

Interactive charts of West Texas Intermediate (WTI or NYMEX) crude oil prices per barrel back to 1946. The price of oil shown is adjusted for inflation using the headline CPI and is shown by default on a logarithmic scale. The current month is updated on an hourly basis with today's latest value.

www.macrotrends.net

Loading…

www.reuters.com

Appreciate the reply!

 

[ribbont]

Yeah my singer tends to travel for his work so we're pretty much relegated to Saturday nights for gigs (which is more than fine by me at this stage).

It's a nice hobby that pays. There's not many hobbies you can say that about. Funny thing about inflation is there has been none for the grinder, bar band musician. I used to make around $200 playing a place like Jakes in the late 80's (with Redline/Excel after HS in 89) and I made around $200 last night. Bands are still getting between $800 to $1200 from bars.

Think of the deadbeat musicians people!! Lol

Anyway, agree on the more targeted stimulus and good point on the retirees. However we know how much everybody bitches so sending out a targeted stimulus during a health emergency would just be one more thing to bitch about so a flat check was much simpler.

Main counter was I wanted to point out that Putin and the Saudis flooded the market in a fight in the spring of 20, we tend to forget that. That's what caused the WTI to drop significantly, which caused gas prices that many Trumpers points to in their 'we had cheap gas' to drop to 1980 levels. I believe the WTI got into the $20's for a moment.

In normal times in the past 10 years it hovers in the 70's and 80's. It was going to always get back to that.

It's currently $76.84, back at its normalized level.

Crude Oil Prices - 70 Year Historical Chart

Interactive charts of West Texas Intermediate (WTI or NYMEX) crude oil prices per barrel back to 1946. The price of oil shown is adjusted for inflation using the headline CPI and is shown by default on a logarithmic scale. The current month is updated on an hourly basis with today's latest value.

www.macrotrends.net

Loading…

www.reuters.com

Appreciate the reply!

Glad you get to keep on rockin'. Don't know how you can still do it. My hands get so stiff nowadays. Gripping a golf club is painful.

Yeah I remember those days. Oil went negative! Crazy! But gas didn't nosedive much. Gas started the year at 2.60ish and ended at 2.30ish. Really, gas was fairly level for several years, including the Obama years.

But when Biden restricted leases, prices rose immediately and by the end of 21, gas was at $3.40, up over 40% in Biden's first year. Increased demand also contributed but why he made that move during an economic recovery baffled me.

Oh well, we'll probably never agree politically but it's always good to discuss with you.

 

[BradStevens]

Oh and folks....read up on project 2025 if you want to know 'the plan'.

Farva is pissed at me bringing it up and wants to downplay it even though his idols (Trump, Vivek and Desantis) are following it to a T.

https://www.project2025.org/

If you don't want to read it (it's 920 something pages) this girl does a good job breaking it down (she's a lib lawyer).

View embedded media

"Take over" is hyperbole. It sounds like they want to change/abolish the administrative state. That's not a new thing. And it wouldn't be a "take over." Prominent liberals want to pack the Court and eliminate the electoral college so that they can win more elections. Would that be a "take over?"

 

[IUPaterade724]

Yeah, IIRC, in CA you can initiate a recall vote with a handful of signatures, and Newsome defeated the thing in a rout. Yet another silly Pub partisan stunt.

Sure, but didn’t you hear him call it Commifornia? Newsome took everyone’s freedom and is making their flag a hammer and sickle! He’s ruined democracy in Commifornia…ahyuck ahyuck.