UpstateSCHokie wrote:CBO scoring at this point is nothing but pure junk. As AG said, these are the same people that scored Obamacare, and look how far off they are. I'm more concerned with who Trump would have on his economic team, and here they are:
Stephen Moore — a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation
Larry Kudlow—a conservative economist and former host of CNBC's Kudlow & Company. He is on the advisory committee for the Kemp Institute at Pepperdine University.
Arthur Laffer—a conservative economist and former member of the Reagan Administration's Economic Policy Advisory Board.
I'll take those 3 guys over anyone that Hillary could tap any day.
This is a typical UWS thread. H2 asks the question, where are the fiscal conservatives, and posts a chart.
People attack the chart, but only one person (5150) actually defended their candidate and said he or she is fiscally conservative and is planning on reducing the debt.
H2 is right, neither of the 2 main candidates is going to do anything to try and reduce the debt. I doubt they'll even try.
Just like no POTUS has tried to do in decades.
No. H2 asks a good question. But his basis/premise (the chart) is tragically flawed. That's a fair thing to call out.
One can go to the site and get information on how they calculated the numbers. Is it flawed because they won't get everything they want? The idea is to look at the plans they've discussed and see what impact that would have on the deficit. It's not perfect, of course.
Laffer being an economist for Trump should be telling - tax cuts will decrease the deficit!
UpstateSCHokie wrote:CBO scoring at this point is nothing but pure junk. As AG said, these are the same people that scored Obamacare, and look how far off they are. I'm more concerned with who Trump would have on his economic team, and here they are:
Stephen Moore — a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation
Larry Kudlow—a conservative economist and former host of CNBC's Kudlow & Company. He is on the advisory committee for the Kemp Institute at Pepperdine University.
Arthur Laffer—a conservative economist and former member of the Reagan Administration's Economic Policy Advisory Board.
I'll take those 3 guys over anyone that Hillary could tap any day.
If you like the Post Office and the Department of Motor Vehicles and you think they’re run well, just wait till you see Medicare, Medicaid and health care done by the government."
I love Kudlow's enthusiasm in December 2007:
The recession debate is over. It's not gonna happen. Time to move on. At a bare minimum, we are looking at Goldilocks 2.0. (And that's a minimum). The Bush boom is alive and well. It's finishing up its sixth splendid year with many more years to come
Ok, I'm just picking on him a little bit.
Kudlow was wrong on inflation - a ridiculous error which shows severe lack of understanding of economics. However, much respect to him for admitting he was wrong. He even seemed to learn a little bit based on more recent statements.
Moore is a gold bug that also got it wrong.
Why would someone trust these people with economic decisions when they got the recession so wrong? It's sad.
Same reason we don't trust you as you've been wrong on the recession and recovery. Your whole community of pointed hat geeks has been discredited. That's what you miss, we don't care which egg head is rolled out, none of you know what you're talking about so remove them all from the system by federation and deregulation. The market is best at governing, not delusional people that believe silly stuff like online taxis being a status symbol.
Its funny, this guy comes on here and wrings his hands about the debt that Trump might run up, but I don't think I've heard a peep about the fact that Obama has doubled the debt over the last 7 years. We are supposed to worry about what Trump might do based on a bunch of assumptions that have a huge amount of uncertainty, but not care about what Obama has actually done.
BTW, one tell tale sign sign that the chart is garbage: there are no error bars to show the uncertainty. Just like the AGW charts the trot out, its just a bunch of contrived BS.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” ― Voltaire (1694 – 1778)
UpstateSCHokie wrote:CBO scoring at this point is nothing but pure junk. As AG said, these are the same people that scored Obamacare, and look how far off they are. I'm more concerned with who Trump would have on his economic team, and here they are:
Stephen Moore — a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation
Larry Kudlow—a conservative economist and former host of CNBC's Kudlow & Company. He is on the advisory committee for the Kemp Institute at Pepperdine University.
Arthur Laffer—a conservative economist and former member of the Reagan Administration's Economic Policy Advisory Board.
I'll take those 3 guys over anyone that Hillary could tap any day.
If you like the Post Office and the Department of Motor Vehicles and you think they’re run well, just wait till you see Medicare, Medicaid and health care done by the government."
I love Kudlow's enthusiasm in December 2007:
The recession debate is over. It's not gonna happen. Time to move on. At a bare minimum, we are looking at Goldilocks 2.0. (And that's a minimum). The Bush boom is alive and well. It's finishing up its sixth splendid year with many more years to come
Ok, I'm just picking on him a little bit.
Kudlow was wrong on inflation - a ridiculous error which shows severe lack of understanding of economics. However, much respect to him for admitting he was wrong. He even seemed to learn a little bit based on more recent statements.
Moore is a gold bug that also got it wrong.
Why would someone trust these people with economic decisions when they got the recession so wrong? It's sad.
Same reason we don't trust you as you've been wrong on the recession and recovery. Your whole community of pointed hat geeks has been discredited. That's what you miss, we don't care which egg head is rolled out, none of you know what you're talking about so remove them all from the system by federation and deregulation. The market is best at governing, not delusional people that believe silly stuff like online taxis being a status symbol.
Its funny, this guy comes on here and wrings his hands about the debt that Trump might run up, but I don't think I've heard a peep about the fact that Obama has doubled the debt over the last 7 years. We are supposed to worry about what Trump might do based on a bunch of assumptions that have a huge amount of uncertainty, but not care about what Obama has actually done.
BTW, one tell tale sign sign that the chart is garbage: there are no error bars to show the uncertainty. Just like the AGW charts the trot out, its just a bunch of contrived BS.
Yep, it's from the marketing department, not the economic department. According to them Trump has no plans, but when you score the nonexistent plan there's a massive collapse of civilization. It's comical.
UpstateSCHokie wrote:CBO scoring at this point is nothing but pure junk. As AG said, these are the same people that scored Obamacare, and look how far off they are. I'm more concerned with who Trump would have on his economic team, and here they are:
Stephen Moore — a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation
Larry Kudlow—a conservative economist and former host of CNBC's Kudlow & Company. He is on the advisory committee for the Kemp Institute at Pepperdine University.
Arthur Laffer—a conservative economist and former member of the Reagan Administration's Economic Policy Advisory Board.
I'll take those 3 guys over anyone that Hillary could tap any day.
If you like the Post Office and the Department of Motor Vehicles and you think they’re run well, just wait till you see Medicare, Medicaid and health care done by the government."
I love Kudlow's enthusiasm in December 2007:
The recession debate is over. It's not gonna happen. Time to move on. At a bare minimum, we are looking at Goldilocks 2.0. (And that's a minimum). The Bush boom is alive and well. It's finishing up its sixth splendid year with many more years to come
Ok, I'm just picking on him a little bit.
Kudlow was wrong on inflation - a ridiculous error which shows severe lack of understanding of economics. However, much respect to him for admitting he was wrong. He even seemed to learn a little bit based on more recent statements.
Moore is a gold bug that also got it wrong.
Why would someone trust these people with economic decisions when they got the recession so wrong? It's sad.
Same reason we don't trust you as you've been wrong on the recession and recovery. Your whole community of pointed hat geeks has been discredited. That's what you miss, we don't care which egg head is rolled out, none of you know what you're talking about so remove them all from the system by federation and deregulation. The market is best at governing, not delusional people that believe silly stuff like online taxis being a status symbol.
Its funny, this guy comes on here and wrings his hands about the debt that Trump might run up
I did nothing of the sort.
UpstateSCHokie wrote: but I don't think I've heard a peep about the fact that Obama has doubled the debt over the last 7 years. We are supposed to worry about what Trump might do based on a bunch of assumptions that have a huge amount of uncertainty, but not care about what Obama has actually done.
Deficits can be beneficial, most people don't deny that. If your infrastructure is underfunded by about 2 trillion then it makes sense to make those investments at the lowest possible interest rate. It's actually fiscally conservative to do so. That's the main point I've made all along.
UpstateSCHokie wrote:BTW, one tell tale sign sign that the chart is garbage: there are no error bars to show the uncertainty. Just like the AGW charts the trot out, its just a bunch of contrived BS.
Whatever you tell yourself to believe what you believe. It's clearly an estimate, has dotted lines and if you care you can go to the website. Or, carry on!
No response on how the CBO actually overestimated the total costs of ACA initially?
UpstateSCHokie wrote:
Its funny, this guy comes on here and wrings his hands about the debt that Trump might run up, but I don't think I've heard a peep about the fact that Obama has doubled the debt over the last 7 years. We are supposed to worry about what Trump might do based on a bunch of assumptions that have a huge amount of uncertainty, but not care about what Obama has actually done.
BTW, one tell tale sign sign that the chart is garbage: there are no error bars to show the uncertainty. Just like the AGW charts the trot out, its just a bunch of contrived BS.
I'm under no illusion that Trump or Clinton will balance the budget or reduce the deficit. And realistically I don't think the average American understands what would need to be done to even attempt it. We'd need to raise taxes and cut spending. Not one or the other, but both. And cut spending across the board, not one or two programs or departments. People are all for cutting spending as long as it's for something they don't use or rely on. Problem is different people use and favor different programs so no matter what you cut someone is going to be unhappy. People say they want someone to balance the budget and cut the deficit but in reality I don't think the American public as a whole is willing to do what has to be done to make that happen.
Forum rules: Please be civil. "You do suck and are a terrible human being." - awesome guy "maybe because you're autistic" - USN_Hokie
Seriously... there's only ONE rule.
Yeah, the key takeaway is the effect of Trump's proposed tax cuts. Clinton's spending plans include tax increases that, while they still don't balance the budget, do no worse than the current (bad) path.
Tax cuts will exacerbate without a comparable reduction in services.
H2, you know I respect your economic views. I've said as much here many times. But this graph...LOL... I'm sorry. This is based on what exactly? Trump's plans are less public than the coca-cola recipe. What he'd do, much less what it would cost, is a huge unknown.
I call bullspit.
Sorry
"Believe me. It's going to be great "
-Don Trump
^^i have a hard time putting numbers to that^^
The CRFB describes their numbers if interested. The biggest impact is decreases in taxes.
you still think the economy is doing just fine, 1% growth on top of .8% for 1st qtr..... we can't take much more of just fine
H2, you know I respect your economic views. I've said as much here many times. But this graph...LOL... I'm sorry. This is based on what exactly? Trump's plans are less public than the coca-cola recipe. What he'd do, much less what it would cost, is a huge unknown.
I call bullspit.
Sorry
"Believe me. It's going to be great "
-Don Trump
^^i have a hard time putting numbers to that^^
The CRFB describes their numbers if interested. The biggest impact is decreases in taxes.
you still think the economy is doing just fine, 1% growth on top of .8% for 1st qtr..... we can't take much more of just fine
Correct. Their snake oil salesman gig is up. They're getting desperate.
I guess my point is that there is no way to guess Trump's agenda. Anything that site guesses is a wild guess since Trump won't say what his plans are, and when he does, it tends to either make no sense or it contradicts somethings he'd only recently set forth. Anyone saying they know what Trump plans is being inventive.
THAT's my point
Trumps numbers could be waaaay better.
Or, way worse.
So I put (the dead dog) on her doorstep!
Salute the Marines
Soon we'll have planes that fly 22000 mph
"#PedoPete" = Hunter's name for his dad.
H2, you know I respect your economic views. I've said as much here many times. But this graph...LOL... I'm sorry. This is based on what exactly? Trump's plans are less public than the coca-cola recipe. What he'd do, much less what it would cost, is a huge unknown.
I call bullspit.
Sorry
"Believe me. It's going to be great "
-Don Trump
^^i have a hard time putting numbers to that^^
The CRFB describes their numbers if interested. The biggest impact is decreases in taxes.
you still think the economy is doing just fine, 1% growth on top of .8% for 1st qtr..... we can't take much more of just fine
It's been very consistent with the trend line that I thought we would be on 7 years ago, in fact, a little better. These last two quarters didn't change much. The long term growth rate of the U.S. economy that is pretty much standard to use in valuation models is 2%. That's about where we've been since the recession. The major difference is that we reached pre-recession GDP a little faster than expected given that we had a debt led recession. I'm just not sure how we will sustain 3% growth. Productivity growth would have to be pretty damn impressive for that to happen and I just don't see it.
RiverguyVT wrote:I guess my point is that there is no way to guess Trump's agenda. Anything that site guesses is a wild guess since Trump won't say what his plans are, and when he does, it tends to either make no sense or it contradicts somethings he'd only recently set forth. Anyone saying they know what Trump plans is being inventive.
THAT's my point
Trumps numbers could be waaaay better.
Or, way worse.
It's almost as if Trump has no plan and is making it up as he goes...
Forum rules: Please be civil. "You do suck and are a terrible human being." - awesome guy "maybe because you're autistic" - USN_Hokie
Seriously... there's only ONE rule.
RiverguyVT wrote:I guess my point is that there is no way to guess Trump's agenda. Anything that site guesses is a wild guess since Trump won't say what his plans are, and when he does, it tends to either make no sense or it contradicts somethings he'd only recently set forth. Anyone saying they know what Trump plans is being inventive.
THAT's my point
Trumps numbers could be waaaay better.
Or, way worse.
It's almost as if Trump has no plan and is making it up as he goes...
Hillary told bernie she would open up medicare to all and give free college to all making less than $125k, she has no plan either. So far I have not heard Trump mention any huge giveaways as she has already agreed to
UpstateSCHokie wrote:CBO scoring at this point is nothing but pure junk. As AG said, these are the same people that scored Obamacare, and look how far off they are. I'm more concerned with who Trump would have on his economic team, and here they are:
Stephen Moore — a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation
Larry Kudlow—a conservative economist and former host of CNBC's Kudlow & Company. He is on the advisory committee for the Kemp Institute at Pepperdine University.
Arthur Laffer—a conservative economist and former member of the Reagan Administration's Economic Policy Advisory Board.
I'll take those 3 guys over anyone that Hillary could tap any day.
This is a typical UWS thread. H2 asks the question, where are the fiscal conservatives, and posts a chart.
People attack the chart, but only one person (5150) actually defended their candidate and said he or she is fiscally conservative and is planning on reducing the debt.
H2 is right, neither of the 2 main candidates is going to do anything to try and reduce the debt. I doubt they'll even try.
Just like no POTUS has tried to do in decades.
No. H2 asks a good question. But his basis/premise (the chart) is tragically flawed. That's a fair thing to call out.
I had a really long paragraph but i'll just sum it up here.
The "republicans" have fractured into the underemployed, undereducated angry trump base that hates globalization and trade deals and the richer, middle and upper class that wants to minimize taxes and increase their wealth. The christian conservatives are stuck in the middle not liking Trump but hating Hilary and her socially liberal agenda enough to side with whoever is against her.
I don't think the underemployed and undereducated angry base cares about fiscal conservatism. They aren't footing the bill for that. So trump could talk about building a wall around the entire country and they'd be okay with that. They won't pay for it.
I do think there are fiscal conservatives left on the republican side, but they're not the loud ones and they're not driving the bus anymore. Trump's message is all around fear and it's hard to have immediate fear regarding the debt. Long term it looks awful, but national debt isn't going to take your job or barge into your house at night and murder you tomorrow.
Fiscal conservatism doesn't exist in either party right now in large numbers.
nolanvt wrote:Elberto is correct. Trump is appealing to LCD of the electorate.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Annnnddd so does Oblammo and Hillary. Your point? Gary Johnson?
"I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." - Thomas Jefferson
nolanvt wrote:Elberto is correct. Trump is appealing to LCD of the electorate.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Annnnddd so does Oblammo and Hillary. Your point? Gary Johnson?
Hilary is definitely using a lot of peoples disgust of trump(which was there before he ever ran for office) to try and swing the vote her way. There's definitely fear in that.
nolanvt wrote:Elberto is correct. Trump is appealing to LCD of the electorate.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Annnnddd so does Oblammo and Hillary. Your point? Gary Johnson?
Hilary is definitely using a lot of peoples disgust of trump(which was there before he ever ran for office) to try and swing the vote her way. There's definitely fear in that.
However, for a rational human who values our country's founding principles, voting for Hillary is not an option. She's a liar and a disgrace who has no business holding any executive branch office or title.
"I predict future happiness for Americans, if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them." - Thomas Jefferson
nolanvt wrote:Elberto is correct. Trump is appealing to LCD of the electorate.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Annnnddd so does Oblammo and Hillary. Your point? Gary Johnson?
Hilary is definitely using a lot of peoples disgust of trump(which was there before he ever ran for office) to try and swing the vote her way. There's definitely fear in that.
However, for a rational human who values our country's founding principles, voting for Hillary is not an option. She's a liar and a disgrace who has no business holding any executive branch office or title.
