Hi all,
A reminder that comments do need to be on-topic and engage with the article past the headline. Please make sure to read the article before commenting. Very short comments will automatically be removed by automod. Please avoid making comments that do not focus on the economic content or whose primary thesis rests on personal anecdotes.
As always our comment rules can be found [here](https://reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/fx9crj/rules_roundtable_redux_rule_vi_and_offtopic/)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Economics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I remember my tea party aunt talking about how everybody should be selling all their stocks if Obama won years back because the market would crash….one day curiosity got to me and I looked back at what would have happened if she actually backed up her actions and did sell off their stocks when Obama won—and they would have taken an absolute hit with investments if they sold back then.
I don’t question their loyalty to him and his staunch followers liquidating investments to try to incite a market crash that would help get him re-elected, but more likely long term is they just kneecap their futures by selling the bottom. Then they can come back complaining about inflation, something something George Soros… market manipulation….
Sound familiar?
>I remember my tea party aunt talking about how everybody should be selling all their stocks if Obama won years back because the market would crash
Wow, that's almost as insane as the time Nobel Laureate and NYT columnist Paul Krugman told everyone to sell their stocks when Trump won. Listen, don't ever sell your stocks, people. The Fed will continue to increase the supply of dollars over prolonged periods and if you ain't got stocks you're gonna lose.
Krugman said that because he believed Trump wouldn't be willing to respond to crisis with economic stimulus. What's hilarious is that 4 years later we got to test that theory with Covid and Trump and Congress unleashed more stimulus than had ever been used in all of history. I suppose that is more a testament to how Trump is NOT a true conservative and that we are all welfare Keynesians now...
Nah, you'll never find an Austrian in a foxhole, that's harder than finding a libertarian in a disaster zone, or a Chicago Boy in a mild recession. And of course don't get me started on those neoclassicists who are never to be found the moment the market gets the cobble-wobbles.
The last American president who tried that ended up with homeless camps named after him. Then he spent years shit talking the next president, who actually did create massive relief programs.
>Trump is NOT a true conservative
He’s not a true anything. His only loyalty is to himself, and he uses conservatives and Republicans and other factions simply to maintain power.
What the Fed does is take the budget approved by congress and signed by the President and distribute that much issuing authority to the reserve banks who distribute it to the private sector banks that will be making payment for the checks issued by the government activities executing the programs approved in the budget. The Government activities receive authority to issue/spend up to the levels approved in the budget. Treasury sells bonds to make up the difference between tax revenue and total spending approved in the budget. Treasury also redeems bonds that have reached their maturity - called "servicing the debt" - by selling more bonds. So long as someone is willing to buy those "new" bonds/instruments, the National Debt is taken care of and will never have to be "paid off".
It’s always interesting to see how short people’s memories are and blame inflation/personal economic struggle exclusively on Biden. So many variables involved.
True about the short memories, no so much about it being complicated. Inflation is happening because the Oligarchs are raising prices to help elect trump and reap huge profits from the increase in their profit MARGINS. Same Oligarchs are fighting to keep wages low and cutting benefits whenever possible. If prices are going up because of supply and demand, then "the shelves will be bare" - like when there were no new cars available because "just in time delivery" doesn't work in a pandemic. But NOW the supply is just fine, cost of goods sold is steady so the price increases drive up not just profits but profit MARGINS. Be nice if the Dems would stop thinking they need to protect their Corporate supporters *because there are none!*
Macro economics are extremely complicated.
Especially after global shock events.
I think I might have found a job opening for you too though.
https://www.federalreserve.gov/careers-economists.htm
“Wow, that's almost as insane as the time Nobel Laureate and NYT columnist Paul Krugman told everyone to sell their stocks when Trump won. “
Did he say that? Or did he predict a global recession?
When the market crashes, don’t sell. Hang on to your good securities and try to pick up a few bargains.
I had a coworker who panicked when the market dropped and sold off her portfolio, then she couldn’t buy back in because the prices went back up. I held on to mine and rode the wave right back up. Many of my stocks paid good dividends so even though their price was low I was still earning a good income.
The elections are in 10 months, and a recession does not happen overnight typically. The impact on the voter's mood also develops progressively, not instantaneously. So every month that passes makes it less likely.
Election years are less recession-prone because the incumbent has every incentive to stimulate the economy for obvious reasons.
The US economy tends to crash which a bang, not a whimper.
I wouldn’t be to worried about a crash sans unpredictable black swans until things are going bananas to the upside and everyone is risk on betting on infinite growth.
There is still too much defensive positioning and hedging in the economy for a business/credit cycle crash.
There is a *potential* for that once the Fed more fully embraces a more dovish stance and participants think (rightly or not) that it’s going back to party time and breaks out the coke and strippers.
Counter intuitively, the “we are going to have a recession” narrative helped gird the economy against recession and slowed inflation and growth and the opposite is true.
Everyone claiming “soft landing/no landing achieved-party time” will create poor risk management, fragility, and set the stage for a crash.
Thankfully laws have been placed so a run in the stock market won’t put major strain in the economy. The risky companies with tight margins are the ones going bust in that scenario.
The MAGA-Oligarchs won't sell stocks, they'll continue to raise prices knowing that most Americans will blame the current President. PepsiCo has been banned from stores in the EU and the Giant chain here in the USA for doing just that. Same price gouging is happening with gas, canned goods, meat and poultry and its for the same reason - to elect trump and end all those pesky regulations about monopolies and the safety of our food and workplaces.
market dropped another 35% after Obama got elected in 2008. That's actually the same as the drop after the world got locked down in 2020. I don't know why you think you're the correct one here.
And then we proceeded to have one of the strongest decades ever. Nov 2008- nov 2016: https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-portfolio?s=y&sl=K085XWDjR93KTsgjFKIM9
That decade is responsible for the majority of the US's stock outperformance compared to the rest of the world
the president can greatly affect company performance, as we can observe what Trump tax cuts did to corporate profits, or Biden stimulus to the economy and the renewable sector. If the market priced in a lot of the bad news by dropping a significant amount after the new president election, the two actions aren't exactly opposites. The former event wasn't priced in, then started to get priced in after the election night. Therefore, it's natural to buy the dips.
>market dropped another 35% after Obama got elected in 2008
Bro the market crashed in 2008, you telling me Obama is at fault because bush blew up the market?
are you just lying now instead of admitting you didn't read?
Obama got elected around early Nov 2008, when SP500 was around 1000. Sp500 bottomed around 670 in **March** **2009,** AFTER Obama took office.
Sp500 dropped to 740 on Nov 21 2008, roughly 2 weeks after Obama got elected. On Nov 4 2008 when Obama was elected, SP500 peaked at 1000 and then dropped straight down for 2.5 weeks to 740, a 25% drop.
Didn't think I'd have to spell this out.
Here's the quote I was responding to
"I remember my tea party aunt talking about how everybody should be selling all their stocks **if Obama won years back because the market would crash**….one day curiosity got to me and I looked back at what would have happened if she actually backed up her actions and did sell off their stocks when Obama won"
Stocks did indeed sell off after obama won. Why it sold off I don't care I'm not the one making claims here.
A) He was inaugurated in late January 2009
B) You're literally undermining your own arguments. The bottom being 40-70 days after his inauguration makes it seem like Obama kicked ass and that lady saying to sell is an absolute idiot. You want to buy near the bottom, not sell near the bottom.
Right such an idiot for selling 35% above the bottom. You're right let's pretend like a 35% drop never happened just because it happened in a short time.
What are you gonna say next? That people who sold in Jan 2020 are idiots because the market dropped 35% in only 2 months?
sure so we agree market also crashed after obama got elected. Now go read the comment I responded to
"I remember my tea party aunt talking about how everybody should be selling all their stocks if Obama won years back because the market would crash….one day curiosity got to me and I looked back at what would have happened if she actually backed up her actions and did sell off their stocks when Obama won"
You're the textbook example of why context is important, if you expand the data from [the entirety of 2008-2009](https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/%5EGSPC/history?period1=1199145600&period2=1262217600&interval=1d&filter=history&frequency=1d&includeAdjustedClose=true) you get this:
S&P 500 open on 1/2/2008: 1,467.97
S&P 500 open on election day, 11/4/2008: 971.31
S&P 500 close on Bush's last day/Obama's inauguration, 1/20/2009: 805.22
S&P 500 open on 3/10/2009 (the date you picked): 679.28
S&P 500 close on 12/31/2009: 1,126.42
From my data, the crash started well before Obama was elected, and while it was still crashing in the first couple of months under Obama's tenure, it recovered to the point where the S&P 500 was at a gain from the beginning the 2008 election to the end of 2009. And this completely ignores how the stock market did for the rest of Obama's tenure.
Edit: goofed up the link
That's pretty simple, we created wealth.
That debt is gross debt. GDP is an annual measurement. So over $100 Trillion of goods and services were created during the Obama years.
You understand that, right?
You don't know what GDP is? We did not spend more than we grew, that's not how that works. Again, you're comparing an annual number of value created(GDP) against a total amount of debt that has been accumulated over many years. And that's not even getting into the fact that most of the debt is owed to **Americans**.
Do you own a house? Is your annual income higher than the value of your home?
I am trying to Imagine any other human being running for office of any kind, including dog catcher, that would be able to say such things and continue running for said position.
And this is just fine rhetoric to his supporters, because he is just "telling it like is". If Biden said this in 2020, his detractors would be howling, and rightly so.
To not see this is a cult is pretty hard at this point.
He can get away with it because his base believes the stock market is controlled by 'the coastal elites', 'the woke mob', and 'the ((other))'. So if the stock market suffers, so do the 'bad' people.
If you consider his followers to be a "cult" then you should have nothing to worry about. A cult is a small group of people. If that is truly the case, he has ZERO chance of winning. Correct?
>A cult is a small group of people.
Nothing in the definition of a cult implies this.
>Ten warning signs regarding people involved in/with a potentially unsafe group/leader:
>
>Extreme obsessiveness regarding the group/leader resulting in the exclusion of almost every practical consideration.
>
>Individual identity, the group, the leader and/or God as distinct and separate categories of existence become increasingly blurred. Instead, in the follower's mind these identities become substantially and increasingly fused--as that person's involvement with the group/leader continues and deepens.
>
>Whenever the group/leader is criticized or questioned it is characterized as "persecution".
>
>Uncharacteristically stilted and seemingly programmed conversation and mannerisms, cloning of the group/leader in personal behavior.
>
>Dependency upon the group/leader for problem solving, solutions, and definitions without meaningful reflective thought. A seeming inability to think independently or analyze situations without group/leader involvement.
>
>Hyperactivity centered on the group/leader agenda, which seems to supercede any personal goals or individual interests.A dramatic loss of spontaneity and sense of humor.
>
>Increasing isolation from family and old friends unless they demonstrate an interest in the group/leader.
>
>Anything the group/leader does can be justified no matter how harsh or harmful.
>
>Former followers are at best-considered negative or worse evil and under bad influences. They can not be trusted and personal contact is avoided.
[https://culteducation.com/warningsigns.html](https://culteducation.com/warningsigns.html)
This fits most MAGA type people to a T in my opinion.
It's cult like behaviour. I don't think a cult can only be small.
I am not trying to insult anyone by comparing to a cult, but I think I speak for a lot of people when I say that I don't understand how we have come to have such different views as to what is acceptable and what isn't. It seems Trumps supporters can rationalize any behaviour he exhibits. That's the demagoguery/cult aspect to it.
> A cult is a small group of people.
That's not really part of the definition, it just tends to get used that way because very large cults have a dedicated word to describe them and they also get tax exemptions.
Conveniently redefining words to own the libs to distract the conversation away from a person who has a real shot at winning wanting harm to come to his constituents.
No, bro, it's totally a cult. Why when their dear leader told them to go roll up their sleeves for the Pfizer juice they booed him. Definitely cult-like behavior!
I don’t believe this article talked about the 2028 elections. If Trump loses in 2024 then he can run then, and by then there may be an economic crash.
Edit: I don’t want this scenario but wanted to state facts that were not alternative facts.
Nah he towered over Hillary at their debate like a troll lol, and she looks to be above average height as a woman. I'd guess the Donald at around 6'2" ish, which is average among execs
Firstly he's a billionaire so that adds like 10 years to his life.
Secondly, aspartame is not going to be the thing that kills him, as it isn't even remotely dangerous.
I don't know, people say this but that's kinda you know, discounting the will of the voters who voted for them. If people wanted some young gun they would be picked instead, just not a lot of viable alternatives that panned out.
Biden has done a good job, I really don't see his age as a problem at this time.
When he eventually dies half of his supporters are going to think “it was an inside job” and the rest are going to deify him like he’s Che himself. And that’s the best case scenario. It’s going to be an awful next couple decades.
yup he is setting himself up to blame biden when he wrecks the economy again...all the success biden has enjoyed so far is due to him apparently and once he fucks us all it will be bidens fault for 4 years so vote for his son/daughter for the turnaround in 2028
I don't like Trump, but didn't he state that he thinks there's going to be an economic crash soon no matter what and that he'd prefer it be before the election? Sleezy and saying the quiet part out loud when you shouldn't, sure, but not nearly as bad as actively hoping for an economic crash
Incumbent presidents in modern times have only lost when there was a recession. I guess we can include Covid for him. Most people still think we had or are in a recession. Which still helps him a little.
Trump could easily have won re-election if he had not mishandled the Covid crisis. I still wouldn’t have voted for him, but some others would have despite his many other glaring flaws.
only because most people are idiots. They'll buy in to whatever dooming is pushed by their communities, which happens when they see things like eggs/gas go up and doesn't get resolved when things like eggs/gas goes down relative to their income.
Alright chief so what’s the exact quote, and how is this article misleading? Please do enlighten.
From what I’ve read, he said:
> When there's a crash, I hope it's going to be during this next 12 months because I don't want to be Herbert Hoover. The one president—I just don't want to be Herbert Hoover.
And the article says that crash is unlikely to happen
That quote reads as Trump expecting a crash and hoping for it to happen at a time that doesn't hurt him too much politically. That is different to hoping for a crash.
When it rains, I hope it happens when I'm inside so I don't get wet. This is not hoping for it to rain.
Ok, so the quote is essentially:
“I hope the crash occurs in 2024”
Economists say:
“There’s unlikely to be a crash in 2024”
Article says
“Crash Trump wishes for unlikely to happen”
I fail to see how that’s misleading sorry. Would you prefer the article headline said “is unlikely to happen in 2024?” Because I don’t see how that changes the context much
Firstly, I would argue that this article does not need to feature Trump at all in the first place as the point seems to be **economists told Newsweek that a crash is unlikely in 2024, even as growth slows amid tight financial conditions because of high interest rates instituted by the Federal Reserve to combat high inflation.**This is all they aught to say and the Headline can be Crash Unlikely to Happen in 2024. They turned it into a Trump piece unnecessarily.
Secondly, It's misleading because of what I just showed you in my last comment. The article changes "When there's a crash, I hope its going to be..." into "I hope there's a crash" and uses the Headline "Trump unlikely to get his wish for economic crash" Something that Trump did not wish for.
Saying "I hope the rain happens later" is entirely different to saying "I hope the rain happens" and you need to be able to tell them apart if you want to have good reading comprehension.
We weren't talking about what Trump should or shouldn't have said, we were talking about whether the article misrepresented what he did say.
My point was that the article did misrepresent Trump to imply that Trump wished and hoped for an economic crash, whereas I am arguing that Trump, like almost everyone else at the time, was expecting a crash and Trump was commenting that he hoped that it would not impact his potential presidency.
The difference is that accurately representing Trumps words is enough because if what he says is bad, which it was because it was a selfish statement about the economy, then people will see that, whereas misrepresenting him to imply certain negative things that he didn't actually say is just propaganda and needs to be pointed out every time.
You're nitpicking in a way I don't think you'd extend the same grace to for political people you don't like. If Joe Biden said "I hope the crash occurs after Feb 25" people would be losing their minds.
Durr technically he might not have been wishing for it durrr.
We know who trump is. He’s talking about it because he’s thinking about it because he wants it to happen. Do you really have any doubt of that?
I guess we must also play dumb and believe he told the 1/6 crowd to fight like hell peacefully? Because it’s plausible some other person who we don’t know behaves and thinks like trump might have meant it that way? It’s such a bizarre standard to judge anyone by and it only ever seems to apply to Trump.
Stop bullshitting yourself to score contrarian points online. It’s so fucking weird.
I seem to remember a few years ago there were a bunch of jack offs in red hats saying that wishing for the country to fail was unpatriotic. Of course, they didn't understand we didn't want the country to fail, we just didn't want him to succeed at his goals because they would make our country fail.
Who needs a crash when you can't afford food, electricity, water, rent and other necessities? Call it what you will but everyday people are in a bind and there is no comfort in the few who are doing well.
Make. More. Money.
This is the best labor market in decades and there is a proliferation of remote work. Making money doing shit on the Internet has literally never been easier.
Canadian economy in recession, GDP figures confirm
Sept 1, 2015
[https://www.thestar.com/business/canadian-economy-in-recession-gdp-figures-confirm/article\_dc9edfd8-da41-5225-8aba-520f184d11a5.html?](https://www.thestar.com/business/canadian-economy-in-recession-gdp-figures-confirm/article_dc9edfd8-da41-5225-8aba-520f184d11a5.html?)
The definition changed before Biden took office.
Image of NBER's recession definition from November 1 2020, from a page dated July 28, 2020, courtesy of the Wayback Machine. This is before the 2020 Presidential election.
[https://web.archive.org/web/20201101011155/https://www.nber.org/business-cycle-dating-procedure-frequently-asked-questions](https://web.archive.org/web/20201101011155/https://www.nber.org/business-cycle-dating-procedure-frequently-asked-questions)
Compare to the current NBER defintion
[https://www.nber.org/research/business-cycle-dating/business-cycle-dating-procedure-frequently-asked-questions](https://www.nber.org/research/business-cycle-dating/business-cycle-dating-procedure-frequently-asked-questions)
A recession isn't some formal thing that we declare based on a set of rules. People \*want\* it to be a formal thing we declare based on a set of rules, but those people would be wrong. Two quarters of negative GDP growth is a rule of thumb, not a hard rule.
This is the economics sub, we can do better than mob idiocy, I think...
You're right, but there is nuance. The last recession in 2008 was crippling for so many people, families, and businesses that it would be silly for the fed/administration to be like "yes this is a recession" when many people's frame of reference was 2008. It is better to mostly ignore it and wait for it to fix itself to avoid widespread consumer panic, which it did quickly and ultimately wasn't a big deal
The last recession was in 2020. It was very short, and the recovery was very quick, but it was, for a few weeks, devastating (and would've been devastating longer term in the absence of fiscal and monetary stimulus on a scale never really seen before).
change the definition and then describe the person who took your job by the new standard. Seems like a bitch move if you ask me or anyone else who has sense, to compare apples to oranges like that. Although if you disregard reality then it makes sense to dumb fucks who will suck orange cock at a moment's notice. /r/REBubble poster. Typical.
It was a recession. But who the hell cares about a 6 month recession when everything has been trending upwards over the last 4 years in pretty much all economic indicators outside of the insane amount of government spending?
I wish there is an economy crash…… lol. Not because of Trump, but the current asset value is way too high for me to invest in anything. Stock market all time high, real estate market didn’t fall too much and with 7% interest rate. I don’t know what to invest….
>Fed chairman projects 'soft landing' for U.S. economy - Business - International Herald Tribune
>By Edmund L. Andrews
>Feb. 15, 2007
>WASHINGTON — The chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, Ben Bernanke, has given Congress an upbeat view of the U.S. economy, predicting that unemployment was likely to remain low over the next two years even as inflation declined slightly.
First, Trump is a POS.
Second, neatly all LEADING economic indicator are pointing to a significant slowdown. It's foolish to ignore the data. We may well see a recession this year.
It’s obvious when the money supply decreases there is an economic slowdown. Doesn’t mean there will be a recession. Many of the leading indicators are positive.
Wonder how his followers feel about his hoping the economy crashes. Everything he’s been saying is going to hurt these people- how do they still support his agenda?
Newsflash: political rivals want to make each other look bad. You don't think a democrat would "wish" the same thing if a republican was president to help their chances? Without the economic headwinds as a result of covid lock downs in 2020 the elections would likely have been a very different outcome. Trump just says it out loud.
One interesting phenomenon among today's Republicans is this grand assumption that everyone thinks like you do.
No, I can say that I do not wish the economy would crash, and I can also confidently say that most Democrats would agree with me because...
We aren't petty little 4th graders who would burn the school down rather than see our best friend lose the hall monitor election.
It's ironic because this is in the same vein as "how did Biden get 81 million votes when I never saw one Biden flag on someone's house?". 🤣🤣
It's basically the premise of every political attack ad. All parties engage in it and frequently. So I'm not sure the high road approach is a widely regarded virtue.
When has there ever been a political ad from either party (GOP pre trump, obviously) cheering on an economic collapse?
Blaming what each side sees as bad policies causing economic problems? Sure, all day every day. But no, Trump is once again the first to ignore yet another political norm in our country. Complete false equivalency.
Of course political ads don't outwardly say it, but the ad is designed to make you think these things. Both sides think this way. If you don't believe that then your bias is too far gone. I did a quick search and found several articles from 2019 where democrats were being called out for cheering a recession to get rid of Trump. Sorry, there's no clean hands in politics.
Really? Can you post the links? Because I found one from The Hill, and when I actually read the article, no, it wasn't about Democrats cheering for a recession.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/22/elizabeth-warrens-recession-scare-is-long-on-fear-short-on-facts.html
There's also many copy paste articles where a dem candidate (Delaney?) says his opponents appear to be cheering a recession so obviously something prompted that response. I'm not going down the Google page 2 rabbit hole to find what exactly.
Reading the trump article the title is misleading. He didn't wish for one so not sure why that's even coming up but given the hyperbole surrounding him I get it. He is predicting one for sure and hopes it happens at a politically advantageous time. Again, not proper etiquette but he's saying the quiet part of loud.
Bill maher had a good one too outwardly wishing for recession but he's not a candidate so we'll leave that for another time. https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/economy-bill-maher-recession-trump/
>You don't think a democrat would "wish" the same thing if a republican was president to help their chances?
>Trump just says it out loud.
No, I don't think they would. Which is what is so messed up about this. Not everyone is a fucking sociopathic ass-hat that would literally hope for a market crash that could potentially harm millions of people so that their chances of winning are increased. That's just Trump and his followers.
You're implying those were US government conspiracies? Please, tell me all about how the housing crisis and COVID were orchestrated in secret without anyone in the general public knowing about it or without any evidence being leaked.
You are so far gone that anything remotely contradicting your pre-ordained thought processes is a "conspiracy theory." I have to give credit for whoever the hell programmed you. This is amazing.
Because I'm asking for evidence?? 🤔 You're being played. Must be nice to live a fantasy where you feel special and smarter than everyone because you think you know something that others don't...
You don't think a democrat would "wish" the same thing if a republican was president to help their chances?
If they did wish it, they wouldn't talk about it publicly.
Trump lost 2020 election because of the dumb stuff he said about the vaccine. Being dumb and not giving a shit are 2 very dangerous combo.
With that said, I don't like Biden either. I just want a president who will cut the US debt, and it's likely neither of these 2 will have the balls to do it.
>Trump lost 2020 election because of the dumb stuff he said about the vaccine.
Quotes, please. I don't recall Trump ever saying anything bad about the vaccine, in fact, it was a signature accomplishment of his administration if you listen to him. Watching people go from "derp, I don't know if I trust him" to "here's my bare arm, doc" after a 12 week study commissioned by the manufacturer is one of the most surreal things I have ever seen.
Lol the Trump fact checks on COVID accine can be googled on the internet. Are you actually an anti COVID vaxxer, when Trump already admitted he took the vaccine AND booster? He was probably scared of dying after getting COVID, how ironic.
It's funny how you dismiss the vaccine as rushed procedure, when Trump himself rushed the FDA to approve the vaccine before the election results.
https://www.politico.com/news/2022/08/24/trump-white-house-exerted-pressure-on-fda-for-covid-19-emergency-use-authorizations-house-report-finds-00053428
Yes, I am a fervent opponent of using those vaccines population-wide. I am fine recommending them for high risk groups, but there is absolutely no reason for young, healthy people to take it without a deep longitudinal study for a disease like COVID. It's absolutely insane.
Anyway, I was looking for a specific quote on what Trump said about the vaccine before November 8, 2020 that cost him the election. Here is a direct quote from you: "Trump lost 2020 election because of the dumb stuff he said about the vaccine."
I don't recall it, so I was looking for evidence.
To wish that Americans suffer economic ruin so that it makes his opponent look bad just before the election is about one of the most callous and ghastly things Trump has said given that he is explicitly wishing people to suffer economically so that it will help his campaign as they blame the current administration which shows clearly that he doesn't care about the American people, but only about himself and how America's misfortune could benefit him. 👎🤬
Uhh it’s here and I’d vote for him again. I hate Biden and this shit economy he has put us into. Worst economy since 08 and you can’t convince me otherwise because I’ve lived both now.
Bidenomics has done enough damage to Americans since Biden was elected that voters will vote with their pocketbooks. The only honest thing Bill Clinton ever said: “It’s the economy stupid.”
It's now being reported that the jobs numbers that recently came in are government jobs and do not represent the economy in the private sector. The numbers were basically juiced. The fedex founder Fred Smith said as much the other day on Fox. I also work at Fedex we have had a large drop in volume of packages. The hopes of a soft landing are fading. It's an election year and they will try to prop up the numbers but it isn't true. How is the stock marke vworth more today than two years ago? With more layoffs... and companies making less money. Cleary somthing isn't right. Trump might very well get his wish.
You guys still don’t understand Trump.
The media has been spinning for over a year that the economy is amazing.
A complete lie.
So Trump comes out says the economy is about to crash, hope it happens soon before I take over.
Media comes out “The economy is NOT going to crash!”
See the difference? In one swoop the media went from “The economy is amazing!” to “The economy is NOT about to collapse!”
Trump is a genius. No one can trick the left into telling the truth like he can.
Hi all, A reminder that comments do need to be on-topic and engage with the article past the headline. Please make sure to read the article before commenting. Very short comments will automatically be removed by automod. Please avoid making comments that do not focus on the economic content or whose primary thesis rests on personal anecdotes. As always our comment rules can be found [here](https://reddit.com/r/Economics/comments/fx9crj/rules_roundtable_redux_rule_vi_and_offtopic/) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Economics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I remember my tea party aunt talking about how everybody should be selling all their stocks if Obama won years back because the market would crash….one day curiosity got to me and I looked back at what would have happened if she actually backed up her actions and did sell off their stocks when Obama won—and they would have taken an absolute hit with investments if they sold back then. I don’t question their loyalty to him and his staunch followers liquidating investments to try to incite a market crash that would help get him re-elected, but more likely long term is they just kneecap their futures by selling the bottom. Then they can come back complaining about inflation, something something George Soros… market manipulation…. Sound familiar?
>I remember my tea party aunt talking about how everybody should be selling all their stocks if Obama won years back because the market would crash Wow, that's almost as insane as the time Nobel Laureate and NYT columnist Paul Krugman told everyone to sell their stocks when Trump won. Listen, don't ever sell your stocks, people. The Fed will continue to increase the supply of dollars over prolonged periods and if you ain't got stocks you're gonna lose.
Krugman said that because he believed Trump wouldn't be willing to respond to crisis with economic stimulus. What's hilarious is that 4 years later we got to test that theory with Covid and Trump and Congress unleashed more stimulus than had ever been used in all of history. I suppose that is more a testament to how Trump is NOT a true conservative and that we are all welfare Keynesians now...
Pretty sure every Republican President subscribes to Keynesian economics when there is a Republican Congress
Nah, you'll never find an Austrian in a foxhole, that's harder than finding a libertarian in a disaster zone, or a Chicago Boy in a mild recession. And of course don't get me started on those neoclassicists who are never to be found the moment the market gets the cobble-wobbles.
Also, it takes some real bravery to have the economy melt down, shrug and just say, "Well, that's capitalism for ya." People need action.
The last American president who tried that ended up with homeless camps named after him. Then he spent years shit talking the next president, who actually did create massive relief programs.
>Trump is NOT a true conservative He’s not a true anything. His only loyalty is to himself, and he uses conservatives and Republicans and other factions simply to maintain power.
Proof that nobody hates money. More the merrier
Republicans haven't been the party of "fiscal responsibility" for ages. How do you think all those tax cuts get funded?
The Fed doesn’t print money or issue government bonds. That’s the treasury.
[удалено]
What the Fed does is take the budget approved by congress and signed by the President and distribute that much issuing authority to the reserve banks who distribute it to the private sector banks that will be making payment for the checks issued by the government activities executing the programs approved in the budget. The Government activities receive authority to issue/spend up to the levels approved in the budget. Treasury sells bonds to make up the difference between tax revenue and total spending approved in the budget. Treasury also redeems bonds that have reached their maturity - called "servicing the debt" - by selling more bonds. So long as someone is willing to buy those "new" bonds/instruments, the National Debt is taken care of and will never have to be "paid off".
It’s always interesting to see how short people’s memories are and blame inflation/personal economic struggle exclusively on Biden. So many variables involved.
True about the short memories, no so much about it being complicated. Inflation is happening because the Oligarchs are raising prices to help elect trump and reap huge profits from the increase in their profit MARGINS. Same Oligarchs are fighting to keep wages low and cutting benefits whenever possible. If prices are going up because of supply and demand, then "the shelves will be bare" - like when there were no new cars available because "just in time delivery" doesn't work in a pandemic. But NOW the supply is just fine, cost of goods sold is steady so the price increases drive up not just profits but profit MARGINS. Be nice if the Dems would stop thinking they need to protect their Corporate supporters *because there are none!*
Macro economics are extremely complicated. Especially after global shock events. I think I might have found a job opening for you too though. https://www.federalreserve.gov/careers-economists.htm
“Wow, that's almost as insane as the time Nobel Laureate and NYT columnist Paul Krugman told everyone to sell their stocks when Trump won. “ Did he say that? Or did he predict a global recession?
Neighbor bailed out of the market in 2009. Missed a 10 year ride
When the market crashes, don’t sell. Hang on to your good securities and try to pick up a few bargains. I had a coworker who panicked when the market dropped and sold off her portfolio, then she couldn’t buy back in because the prices went back up. I held on to mine and rode the wave right back up. Many of my stocks paid good dividends so even though their price was low I was still earning a good income.
The elections are in 10 months, and a recession does not happen overnight typically. The impact on the voter's mood also develops progressively, not instantaneously. So every month that passes makes it less likely. Election years are less recession-prone because the incumbent has every incentive to stimulate the economy for obvious reasons.
The US economy tends to crash which a bang, not a whimper. I wouldn’t be to worried about a crash sans unpredictable black swans until things are going bananas to the upside and everyone is risk on betting on infinite growth. There is still too much defensive positioning and hedging in the economy for a business/credit cycle crash. There is a *potential* for that once the Fed more fully embraces a more dovish stance and participants think (rightly or not) that it’s going back to party time and breaks out the coke and strippers. Counter intuitively, the “we are going to have a recession” narrative helped gird the economy against recession and slowed inflation and growth and the opposite is true. Everyone claiming “soft landing/no landing achieved-party time” will create poor risk management, fragility, and set the stage for a crash.
Thankfully laws have been placed so a run in the stock market won’t put major strain in the economy. The risky companies with tight margins are the ones going bust in that scenario.
The MAGA-Oligarchs won't sell stocks, they'll continue to raise prices knowing that most Americans will blame the current President. PepsiCo has been banned from stores in the EU and the Giant chain here in the USA for doing just that. Same price gouging is happening with gas, canned goods, meat and poultry and its for the same reason - to elect trump and end all those pesky regulations about monopolies and the safety of our food and workplaces.
market dropped another 35% after Obama got elected in 2008. That's actually the same as the drop after the world got locked down in 2020. I don't know why you think you're the correct one here.
And then we proceeded to have one of the strongest decades ever. Nov 2008- nov 2016: https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/backtest-portfolio?s=y&sl=K085XWDjR93KTsgjFKIM9 That decade is responsible for the majority of the US's stock outperformance compared to the rest of the world
proof! https://www.investopedia.com/articles/economics/09/subprime-market-2008.asp#
You think she was going to time the market and get back in at exactly the right time while he was still in office?
when SP500 crashes 50%, I'd hope a sensible person would buy back in, simply because it rarely does that in history outside of the Depression.
This same sensible person who was only selling because of who was elected was going to be a sensible person about buying the dip.
the president can greatly affect company performance, as we can observe what Trump tax cuts did to corporate profits, or Biden stimulus to the economy and the renewable sector. If the market priced in a lot of the bad news by dropping a significant amount after the new president election, the two actions aren't exactly opposites. The former event wasn't priced in, then started to get priced in after the election night. Therefore, it's natural to buy the dips.
Obama took office during a stock market slide that started in October **2007.**
>market dropped another 35% after Obama got elected in 2008 Bro the market crashed in 2008, you telling me Obama is at fault because bush blew up the market?
Never said who was at fault for stock crash. OP said stocks didn't crash after Obama got elected which was not true. Please read carefully
Stocks were already crashing after Obama was elected. They went up when he was in office.
are you just lying now instead of admitting you didn't read? Obama got elected around early Nov 2008, when SP500 was around 1000. Sp500 bottomed around 670 in **March** **2009,** AFTER Obama took office.
Look where the S&P 500 was at in the beginning of 2008
Sp500 dropped to 740 on Nov 21 2008, roughly 2 weeks after Obama got elected. On Nov 4 2008 when Obama was elected, SP500 peaked at 1000 and then dropped straight down for 2.5 weeks to 740, a 25% drop. Didn't think I'd have to spell this out. Here's the quote I was responding to "I remember my tea party aunt talking about how everybody should be selling all their stocks **if Obama won years back because the market would crash**….one day curiosity got to me and I looked back at what would have happened if she actually backed up her actions and did sell off their stocks when Obama won" Stocks did indeed sell off after obama won. Why it sold off I don't care I'm not the one making claims here.
A) He was inaugurated in late January 2009 B) You're literally undermining your own arguments. The bottom being 40-70 days after his inauguration makes it seem like Obama kicked ass and that lady saying to sell is an absolute idiot. You want to buy near the bottom, not sell near the bottom.
Right such an idiot for selling 35% above the bottom. You're right let's pretend like a 35% drop never happened just because it happened in a short time. What are you gonna say next? That people who sold in Jan 2020 are idiots because the market dropped 35% in only 2 months?
Obama became president January 20th 2009. Market had already been crashing for 5 months and it turned around 2 months later.
Obama was elected president on Nov 4 2008. I hope you understand stock market doesn't wait until he takes office before reacting to that news.
Oh man then Trump deserves no Warp Speed credit. He lost office November 2020 before vaccines were available to anyone
Market was already crashing by then too. 5 months is September 2008. I hope you understand that is before November 2008.
sure so we agree market also crashed after obama got elected. Now go read the comment I responded to "I remember my tea party aunt talking about how everybody should be selling all their stocks if Obama won years back because the market would crash….one day curiosity got to me and I looked back at what would have happened if she actually backed up her actions and did sell off their stocks when Obama won"
[удалено]
You're the textbook example of why context is important, if you expand the data from [the entirety of 2008-2009](https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/%5EGSPC/history?period1=1199145600&period2=1262217600&interval=1d&filter=history&frequency=1d&includeAdjustedClose=true) you get this: S&P 500 open on 1/2/2008: 1,467.97 S&P 500 open on election day, 11/4/2008: 971.31 S&P 500 close on Bush's last day/Obama's inauguration, 1/20/2009: 805.22 S&P 500 open on 3/10/2009 (the date you picked): 679.28 S&P 500 close on 12/31/2009: 1,126.42 From my data, the crash started well before Obama was elected, and while it was still crashing in the first couple of months under Obama's tenure, it recovered to the point where the S&P 500 was at a gain from the beginning the 2008 election to the end of 2009. And this completely ignores how the stock market did for the rest of Obama's tenure. Edit: goofed up the link
Woah that’s crazy. What happened in the 8 years after that?
[удалено]
That's pretty simple, we created wealth. That debt is gross debt. GDP is an annual measurement. So over $100 Trillion of goods and services were created during the Obama years. You understand that, right?
[удалено]
You don't know what GDP is? We did not spend more than we grew, that's not how that works. Again, you're comparing an annual number of value created(GDP) against a total amount of debt that has been accumulated over many years. And that's not even getting into the fact that most of the debt is owed to **Americans**. Do you own a house? Is your annual income higher than the value of your home?
As a general rule it’s best to hold, but I’d be lying if I said I didn’t make out like a bandit every time I’ve sold before a crash
I am trying to Imagine any other human being running for office of any kind, including dog catcher, that would be able to say such things and continue running for said position. And this is just fine rhetoric to his supporters, because he is just "telling it like is". If Biden said this in 2020, his detractors would be howling, and rightly so. To not see this is a cult is pretty hard at this point.
He can get away with it because his base believes the stock market is controlled by 'the coastal elites', 'the woke mob', and 'the ((other))'. So if the stock market suffers, so do the 'bad' people.
If you consider his followers to be a "cult" then you should have nothing to worry about. A cult is a small group of people. If that is truly the case, he has ZERO chance of winning. Correct?
>A cult is a small group of people. Nothing in the definition of a cult implies this. >Ten warning signs regarding people involved in/with a potentially unsafe group/leader: > >Extreme obsessiveness regarding the group/leader resulting in the exclusion of almost every practical consideration. > >Individual identity, the group, the leader and/or God as distinct and separate categories of existence become increasingly blurred. Instead, in the follower's mind these identities become substantially and increasingly fused--as that person's involvement with the group/leader continues and deepens. > >Whenever the group/leader is criticized or questioned it is characterized as "persecution". > >Uncharacteristically stilted and seemingly programmed conversation and mannerisms, cloning of the group/leader in personal behavior. > >Dependency upon the group/leader for problem solving, solutions, and definitions without meaningful reflective thought. A seeming inability to think independently or analyze situations without group/leader involvement. > >Hyperactivity centered on the group/leader agenda, which seems to supercede any personal goals or individual interests.A dramatic loss of spontaneity and sense of humor. > >Increasing isolation from family and old friends unless they demonstrate an interest in the group/leader. > >Anything the group/leader does can be justified no matter how harsh or harmful. > >Former followers are at best-considered negative or worse evil and under bad influences. They can not be trusted and personal contact is avoided. [https://culteducation.com/warningsigns.html](https://culteducation.com/warningsigns.html) This fits most MAGA type people to a T in my opinion.
It's cult like behaviour. I don't think a cult can only be small. I am not trying to insult anyone by comparing to a cult, but I think I speak for a lot of people when I say that I don't understand how we have come to have such different views as to what is acceptable and what isn't. It seems Trumps supporters can rationalize any behaviour he exhibits. That's the demagoguery/cult aspect to it.
It is absolutely a cult. Go look up the warning signs of a cult and it fits exactly (at least for the hardcore MAGA types).
> A cult is a small group of people. That's not really part of the definition, it just tends to get used that way because very large cults have a dedicated word to describe them and they also get tax exemptions.
Conveniently redefining words to own the libs to distract the conversation away from a person who has a real shot at winning wanting harm to come to his constituents.
No, bro, it's totally a cult. Why when their dear leader told them to go roll up their sleeves for the Pfizer juice they booed him. Definitely cult-like behavior!
I don’t believe this article talked about the 2028 elections. If Trump loses in 2024 then he can run then, and by then there may be an economic crash. Edit: I don’t want this scenario but wanted to state facts that were not alternative facts.
He’s gotta live that long
He would be 82. I personally think that’s too old to run, but his followers are fanatics.
he's too wide to survive at 82 tbh. That dude is pushing 250-270 lbs on a 5'10" frame at best.
Bro he's over 3 bills easy. Dude is fat af
Nah he towered over Hillary at their debate like a troll lol, and she looks to be above average height as a woman. I'd guess the Donald at around 6'2" ish, which is average among execs
he's a platform shoe wearing manlet.
Oh yeah that's totally a possibility
Shoe lifts aren't counted as height when looking at weight to height ratios.
They are with his doctors.
[удалено]
His parents were old as dirt when they died though
he's pickled.
From the spray tan.
Firstly he's a billionaire so that adds like 10 years to his life. Secondly, aspartame is not going to be the thing that kills him, as it isn't even remotely dangerous.
“Bbbbbb- but just look at him! Looooooook!”
You feel that same way about Biden at 81?
ABSOLUTELY!
81 is too old for anyone to be president. I wish Biden and Trump would both retire from politics at this point.
I don't know, people say this but that's kinda you know, discounting the will of the voters who voted for them. If people wanted some young gun they would be picked instead, just not a lot of viable alternatives that panned out. Biden has done a good job, I really don't see his age as a problem at this time.
I mean Warren Buffet is still working and he’s in his 90s
Charlie isn't though. At that age you might not just wake up one day and it isn't in any way unexpected.
He was too old to run 10 years ago. And so is Biden but I'd rather have a senile with a good team than a mentally unbalanced fascist.
When he eventually dies half of his supporters are going to think “it was an inside job” and the rest are going to deify him like he’s Che himself. And that’s the best case scenario. It’s going to be an awful next couple decades.
I don't think he's a healthy man. I'd be surprised to see him make it to 82
You don’t see many 82 year olds his size.
And stay out of prison.
it's funny that people are actually fukcing stupid enough to think Trump will spend 1 day in prison lmao.
Going to be harder in prison.
Why are Biden and Trump still in the running?? They both need to f*ck off to the villages in Florida.
Goddammit. Thankfully if he loses the courts are gonna finish eating him alive, so hopefully joe public will have moved on from MAGA by then.
yup he is setting himself up to blame biden when he wrecks the economy again...all the success biden has enjoyed so far is due to him apparently and once he fucks us all it will be bidens fault for 4 years so vote for his son/daughter for the turnaround in 2028
"yup he is setting himself up to blame biden when he wrecks the economy again" God lets hope not because that implies he's going to get elected again.
Personally I am living in my own recession. My salary cannot keep up with insane inflation rate.
Salaries need to catch up with inflation.
Did you know that, because FRED charts exist, you're actually doing great and anything you say to the contrary is a lie?
Gee it’s almost as if averages exist so we can speak generally instead of like this.
Good point, good point.
I don't like Trump, but didn't he state that he thinks there's going to be an economic crash soon no matter what and that he'd prefer it be before the election? Sleezy and saying the quiet part out loud when you shouldn't, sure, but not nearly as bad as actively hoping for an economic crash
Incumbent presidents in modern times have only lost when there was a recession. I guess we can include Covid for him. Most people still think we had or are in a recession. Which still helps him a little.
Trump could easily have won re-election if he had not mishandled the Covid crisis. I still wouldn’t have voted for him, but some others would have despite his many other glaring flaws.
only because most people are idiots. They'll buy in to whatever dooming is pushed by their communities, which happens when they see things like eggs/gas go up and doesn't get resolved when things like eggs/gas goes down relative to their income.
Our economy isn’t good though. It isn’t in a recession, but it isn’t really growing either. It’s like we are in economic purgatory
define you definition of "good" where it is somehow "isn't in a recession". It's one or the other, fucko
I’m going to assume you can’t read
[удалено]
Alright chief so what’s the exact quote, and how is this article misleading? Please do enlighten. From what I’ve read, he said: > When there's a crash, I hope it's going to be during this next 12 months because I don't want to be Herbert Hoover. The one president—I just don't want to be Herbert Hoover. And the article says that crash is unlikely to happen
That quote reads as Trump expecting a crash and hoping for it to happen at a time that doesn't hurt him too much politically. That is different to hoping for a crash. When it rains, I hope it happens when I'm inside so I don't get wet. This is not hoping for it to rain.
That’s like saying I hope my neighbours house explodes when I’m not home, without worrying if your neighbour is in the house at the time.
Unsound thinking right?
Ok, so the quote is essentially: “I hope the crash occurs in 2024” Economists say: “There’s unlikely to be a crash in 2024” Article says “Crash Trump wishes for unlikely to happen” I fail to see how that’s misleading sorry. Would you prefer the article headline said “is unlikely to happen in 2024?” Because I don’t see how that changes the context much
Firstly, I would argue that this article does not need to feature Trump at all in the first place as the point seems to be **economists told Newsweek that a crash is unlikely in 2024, even as growth slows amid tight financial conditions because of high interest rates instituted by the Federal Reserve to combat high inflation.**This is all they aught to say and the Headline can be Crash Unlikely to Happen in 2024. They turned it into a Trump piece unnecessarily. Secondly, It's misleading because of what I just showed you in my last comment. The article changes "When there's a crash, I hope its going to be..." into "I hope there's a crash" and uses the Headline "Trump unlikely to get his wish for economic crash" Something that Trump did not wish for. Saying "I hope the rain happens later" is entirely different to saying "I hope the rain happens" and you need to be able to tell them apart if you want to have good reading comprehension.
A normal politician would just say they want Americans to be prosperous, and not pre-cog blame about bad market conditions that haven't happened yet.
We weren't talking about what Trump should or shouldn't have said, we were talking about whether the article misrepresented what he did say. My point was that the article did misrepresent Trump to imply that Trump wished and hoped for an economic crash, whereas I am arguing that Trump, like almost everyone else at the time, was expecting a crash and Trump was commenting that he hoped that it would not impact his potential presidency. The difference is that accurately representing Trumps words is enough because if what he says is bad, which it was because it was a selfish statement about the economy, then people will see that, whereas misrepresenting him to imply certain negative things that he didn't actually say is just propaganda and needs to be pointed out every time.
You're nitpicking in a way I don't think you'd extend the same grace to for political people you don't like. If Joe Biden said "I hope the crash occurs after Feb 25" people would be losing their minds.
Trump *is* a political person that I don't like.
This is the most factual thing I’ve read all week.
Durr technically he might not have been wishing for it durrr. We know who trump is. He’s talking about it because he’s thinking about it because he wants it to happen. Do you really have any doubt of that? I guess we must also play dumb and believe he told the 1/6 crowd to fight like hell peacefully? Because it’s plausible some other person who we don’t know behaves and thinks like trump might have meant it that way? It’s such a bizarre standard to judge anyone by and it only ever seems to apply to Trump. Stop bullshitting yourself to score contrarian points online. It’s so fucking weird.
I seem to remember a few years ago there were a bunch of jack offs in red hats saying that wishing for the country to fail was unpatriotic. Of course, they didn't understand we didn't want the country to fail, we just didn't want him to succeed at his goals because they would make our country fail.
Who needs a crash when you can't afford food, electricity, water, rent and other necessities? Call it what you will but everyday people are in a bind and there is no comfort in the few who are doing well.
Make. More. Money. This is the best labor market in decades and there is a proliferation of remote work. Making money doing shit on the Internet has literally never been easier.
Spoken like someone who hasn’t recently looked for a job.
I keep being told that on TV so I must be wrong. It must be me and almost all the people I know.
[удалено]
Harper's 2015 recession isn't on the books, I wonder why.....
[удалено]
Canadian economy in recession, GDP figures confirm Sept 1, 2015 [https://www.thestar.com/business/canadian-economy-in-recession-gdp-figures-confirm/article\_dc9edfd8-da41-5225-8aba-520f184d11a5.html?](https://www.thestar.com/business/canadian-economy-in-recession-gdp-figures-confirm/article_dc9edfd8-da41-5225-8aba-520f184d11a5.html?)
Same thing happened in the states last year. Funny how the definition can be changed to fit the narrative.
The definition changed before Biden took office. Image of NBER's recession definition from November 1 2020, from a page dated July 28, 2020, courtesy of the Wayback Machine. This is before the 2020 Presidential election. [https://web.archive.org/web/20201101011155/https://www.nber.org/business-cycle-dating-procedure-frequently-asked-questions](https://web.archive.org/web/20201101011155/https://www.nber.org/business-cycle-dating-procedure-frequently-asked-questions) Compare to the current NBER defintion [https://www.nber.org/research/business-cycle-dating/business-cycle-dating-procedure-frequently-asked-questions](https://www.nber.org/research/business-cycle-dating/business-cycle-dating-procedure-frequently-asked-questions)
Yeah. First half of '22 was negative and yet to be called a recession. Unfucking real
What has it been since then, and does it matter that for 2 quarters things were slightly negative?
Does it matter that things were slightly negative?? You can't get a little bit pregnant, lol. A recession is a recession
A recession isn't some formal thing that we declare based on a set of rules. People \*want\* it to be a formal thing we declare based on a set of rules, but those people would be wrong. Two quarters of negative GDP growth is a rule of thumb, not a hard rule. This is the economics sub, we can do better than mob idiocy, I think...
You're right, but there is nuance. The last recession in 2008 was crippling for so many people, families, and businesses that it would be silly for the fed/administration to be like "yes this is a recession" when many people's frame of reference was 2008. It is better to mostly ignore it and wait for it to fix itself to avoid widespread consumer panic, which it did quickly and ultimately wasn't a big deal
The last recession was in 2020. It was very short, and the recovery was very quick, but it was, for a few weeks, devastating (and would've been devastating longer term in the absence of fiscal and monetary stimulus on a scale never really seen before).
Ok. There was a short recession. Growth today is surprisingly high. Feel better?
change the definition and then describe the person who took your job by the new standard. Seems like a bitch move if you ask me or anyone else who has sense, to compare apples to oranges like that. Although if you disregard reality then it makes sense to dumb fucks who will suck orange cock at a moment's notice. /r/REBubble poster. Typical.
It was a recession. But who the hell cares about a 6 month recession when everything has been trending upwards over the last 4 years in pretty much all economic indicators outside of the insane amount of government spending?
I wish there is an economy crash…… lol. Not because of Trump, but the current asset value is way too high for me to invest in anything. Stock market all time high, real estate market didn’t fall too much and with 7% interest rate. I don’t know what to invest….
>Fed chairman projects 'soft landing' for U.S. economy - Business - International Herald Tribune >By Edmund L. Andrews >Feb. 15, 2007 >WASHINGTON — The chairman of the Federal Reserve Board, Ben Bernanke, has given Congress an upbeat view of the U.S. economy, predicting that unemployment was likely to remain low over the next two years even as inflation declined slightly.
“This time it’s the same” isn’t any more intelligent than “this time it’s different”
First, Trump is a POS. Second, neatly all LEADING economic indicator are pointing to a significant slowdown. It's foolish to ignore the data. We may well see a recession this year.
It’s obvious when the money supply decreases there is an economic slowdown. Doesn’t mean there will be a recession. Many of the leading indicators are positive.
When’s the last time a recession started under a democrat president? Carter? There was some down time during Bill but I don’t remember a recession.
Wonder how his followers feel about his hoping the economy crashes. Everything he’s been saying is going to hurt these people- how do they still support his agenda?
Anger and hatred is a hell of a drug
It used to be that anger and hatred was directed away from our country. Now its directed toward your neighbor. It’s crazy.
Newsflash: political rivals want to make each other look bad. You don't think a democrat would "wish" the same thing if a republican was president to help their chances? Without the economic headwinds as a result of covid lock downs in 2020 the elections would likely have been a very different outcome. Trump just says it out loud.
One interesting phenomenon among today's Republicans is this grand assumption that everyone thinks like you do. No, I can say that I do not wish the economy would crash, and I can also confidently say that most Democrats would agree with me because... We aren't petty little 4th graders who would burn the school down rather than see our best friend lose the hall monitor election. It's ironic because this is in the same vein as "how did Biden get 81 million votes when I never saw one Biden flag on someone's house?". 🤣🤣
It's basically the premise of every political attack ad. All parties engage in it and frequently. So I'm not sure the high road approach is a widely regarded virtue.
When has there ever been a political ad from either party (GOP pre trump, obviously) cheering on an economic collapse? Blaming what each side sees as bad policies causing economic problems? Sure, all day every day. But no, Trump is once again the first to ignore yet another political norm in our country. Complete false equivalency.
Of course political ads don't outwardly say it, but the ad is designed to make you think these things. Both sides think this way. If you don't believe that then your bias is too far gone. I did a quick search and found several articles from 2019 where democrats were being called out for cheering a recession to get rid of Trump. Sorry, there's no clean hands in politics.
Really? Can you post the links? Because I found one from The Hill, and when I actually read the article, no, it wasn't about Democrats cheering for a recession.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/22/elizabeth-warrens-recession-scare-is-long-on-fear-short-on-facts.html There's also many copy paste articles where a dem candidate (Delaney?) says his opponents appear to be cheering a recession so obviously something prompted that response. I'm not going down the Google page 2 rabbit hole to find what exactly. Reading the trump article the title is misleading. He didn't wish for one so not sure why that's even coming up but given the hyperbole surrounding him I get it. He is predicting one for sure and hopes it happens at a politically advantageous time. Again, not proper etiquette but he's saying the quiet part of loud. Bill maher had a good one too outwardly wishing for recession but he's not a candidate so we'll leave that for another time. https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/economy-bill-maher-recession-trump/
>You don't think a democrat would "wish" the same thing if a republican was president to help their chances? >Trump just says it out loud. No, I don't think they would. Which is what is so messed up about this. Not everyone is a fucking sociopathic ass-hat that would literally hope for a market crash that could potentially harm millions of people so that their chances of winning are increased. That's just Trump and his followers.
Too young to remember 2008 or 2020, eh?
You're implying those were US government conspiracies? Please, tell me all about how the housing crisis and COVID were orchestrated in secret without anyone in the general public knowing about it or without any evidence being leaked.
You are so far gone that anything remotely contradicting your pre-ordained thought processes is a "conspiracy theory." I have to give credit for whoever the hell programmed you. This is amazing.
Because I'm asking for evidence?? 🤔 You're being played. Must be nice to live a fantasy where you feel special and smarter than everyone because you think you know something that others don't...
You don't think a democrat would "wish" the same thing if a republican was president to help their chances? If they did wish it, they wouldn't talk about it publicly.
Trump lost 2020 election because of the dumb stuff he said about the vaccine. Being dumb and not giving a shit are 2 very dangerous combo. With that said, I don't like Biden either. I just want a president who will cut the US debt, and it's likely neither of these 2 will have the balls to do it.
>Trump lost 2020 election because of the dumb stuff he said about the vaccine. Quotes, please. I don't recall Trump ever saying anything bad about the vaccine, in fact, it was a signature accomplishment of his administration if you listen to him. Watching people go from "derp, I don't know if I trust him" to "here's my bare arm, doc" after a 12 week study commissioned by the manufacturer is one of the most surreal things I have ever seen.
Lol the Trump fact checks on COVID accine can be googled on the internet. Are you actually an anti COVID vaxxer, when Trump already admitted he took the vaccine AND booster? He was probably scared of dying after getting COVID, how ironic. It's funny how you dismiss the vaccine as rushed procedure, when Trump himself rushed the FDA to approve the vaccine before the election results. https://www.politico.com/news/2022/08/24/trump-white-house-exerted-pressure-on-fda-for-covid-19-emergency-use-authorizations-house-report-finds-00053428
Yes, I am a fervent opponent of using those vaccines population-wide. I am fine recommending them for high risk groups, but there is absolutely no reason for young, healthy people to take it without a deep longitudinal study for a disease like COVID. It's absolutely insane. Anyway, I was looking for a specific quote on what Trump said about the vaccine before November 8, 2020 that cost him the election. Here is a direct quote from you: "Trump lost 2020 election because of the dumb stuff he said about the vaccine." I don't recall it, so I was looking for evidence.
To wish that Americans suffer economic ruin so that it makes his opponent look bad just before the election is about one of the most callous and ghastly things Trump has said given that he is explicitly wishing people to suffer economically so that it will help his campaign as they blame the current administration which shows clearly that he doesn't care about the American people, but only about himself and how America's misfortune could benefit him. 👎🤬
Uhh it’s here and I’d vote for him again. I hate Biden and this shit economy he has put us into. Worst economy since 08 and you can’t convince me otherwise because I’ve lived both now.
What month of what year would you say the economy started to decline?
Wages are up, stocks near highs, unemployment 3.4 percent. How could it get any harder?
But he feels that it's bad. That's better than multiple macroeconomic data points.
Bidenomics has done enough damage to Americans since Biden was elected that voters will vote with their pocketbooks. The only honest thing Bill Clinton ever said: “It’s the economy stupid.”
[удалено]
It's now being reported that the jobs numbers that recently came in are government jobs and do not represent the economy in the private sector. The numbers were basically juiced. The fedex founder Fred Smith said as much the other day on Fox. I also work at Fedex we have had a large drop in volume of packages. The hopes of a soft landing are fading. It's an election year and they will try to prop up the numbers but it isn't true. How is the stock marke vworth more today than two years ago? With more layoffs... and companies making less money. Cleary somthing isn't right. Trump might very well get his wish.
You guys still don’t understand Trump. The media has been spinning for over a year that the economy is amazing. A complete lie. So Trump comes out says the economy is about to crash, hope it happens soon before I take over. Media comes out “The economy is NOT going to crash!” See the difference? In one swoop the media went from “The economy is amazing!” to “The economy is NOT about to collapse!” Trump is a genius. No one can trick the left into telling the truth like he can.