Irony: Trump the liberal

[EconProf]

[quote=spdrun]Atlanta Fed, 5.4% predicted for Q1 2018:
http://www.businessinsider.com/atlanta-fed-gdp-now-forecasts-5-percent-growth-in-q1-2018-2

Obamacare employer mandate is still in place, BTW. Though personally, I think the whole fucking thing should be torn down and replaced with public insurance for all.[/quote]

You are right about the Atlanta Fed’s forecast, and I stand corrected.
If you want the government to take over all of health care, then stay in California. Several candidates for governor and other offices are pushing “Medicare for All”, or single payer (gov.), or other such take-overs that would give us a complete European/Canadian-style system. They don’t like to talk about the cost, however, which would double the state budget. So, whatever we now pay in income taxes, sales taxes, corporate taxes, etc. would double. Then the wealthy would really start moving out, meaning yet higher taxes for those remaining, etc., etc.

[FlyerInHi]

Econprof, does that mean you are leaving?
Say what you mean and mean what you say.

Btw, AZ, NV, and TX are only a decade or two behind CA, but the latter 2 have no income taxes, Something to consider.

Edit:
I was a great student, and I remember well what my Econ Prof taught me. Mobility of labor means efficiency and wealth creation.
If you look the bright tech sector of the economy, the great majority of workers come from elsewhere outside of California. That’s very good. It means that we are attracting talent that can thrive in our economy. We want the turnover of people coming and going. It’s like refreshing the population.

[FlyerInHi]

I don’t know much about farming, but it seems like food prices are dropping because China is buying less or has threatened to. The markets responded accordingly. I embrace lower food prices. Good for my budget, so thank you, Trump!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/the-latest-blow-to-struggling-family-farms-rising-interest-rates/2018/06/01/ec4d192a-5aac-11e8-b656-a5f8c2a9295d_story.html?utm_term=.bec547eda4e1

[zk]

[quote=EconProf]
Whatever you may think of Trump personally, he is accomplishing objectives that liberals claimed to want. The irony is delicious.[/quote]

Aw, EconProf, you poor little guy. This is all you have left to cling to, isn’t it? A made-up narrative supported only by the standard half-truths, misinterpreted statistics, wishful thinking and distraction sold by right-wing spinners.

In truth, Trump is “accomplishing” next to nothing. Unless you count reducing our standing in the world, weakening the rule of law in our country, freeing racists and misogynists and islamophobes to speak up, giving rich people a tax cut that our children and grandchildren will pay for, and probably starting a trade war.

But good for you! You’ve found your happy place where none of that is real, trump is great for liberals, and America is great “again.” Did they give you a lollipop and a pat on the head, too?

[spdrun]

EconProf: assuming a moderately well-run “Medicare for all” system, the question isn’t whether taxes would increase. The question is whether the average tax increase will be less or greater than the average person or company currently pays (per employee or person) for health care. Being able to pawn “benefits” off onto the government (i.e. “buy in” to Medicare for their employees for a known % of their income) and not have to deal with the shitshow known as benefits management would actually make life easier for a lot of employers.

I don’t presently live in CA, but if it gets passed, I’ll be on a plane the next day. Not having to worry about private insurance is a Godsend and one less thing to stress on.

[FlyerInHi]

I’m surprised that an economist doesn’t think on a macro level. If I remember, we spend less than 20% of GDP on health care. If we can improve aggregate health outcomes and spend less then we have more money to spend on other things. Trump said it would be so easy. It should be irrelevant whether health care is government run or not.

I’m with you spdrun. I hardly use health care, and I don’t want health insurance or signing up or all the crap. It should be show your Social Security card and be eligible for coverage.

Medicare is also crap in an advanced society IMO. It should be government run like the VA. I’m Ok with rationing (don’t like it? You can supplement with private insurance.)

[FlyerInHi]

Econprof is right but not in the ways he enumerated.

On trade and protectionism, Trump is very much like Jesse Jackson. Remember, Clinton signed NAFTA against Democrats.

On immigrantion, Trump is like the unions of the 1970s who feared competition from new immigrants. Since then, Democrats have become more cosmopolitan and multi-cultural

On Korea, Trump is talking to Kim at the highest levels without preconditions. That’s something that hardliners would have never allowed before.

On Russia and China, Trump is weak. Anyone like that would have been accused of being a “commie.” Like readmiting Russia to G7.

[The-Shoveler]

I would take any California democrats promise of universal healthcare with a very large dose of skepticism.

As I said before they have already voted it down at least twice.

They seem very much in the pockets of the insurance companies.

[EconProf]

More good economic news: Unemployment compensation claims were predicted to come in at 233,000. Instead, they were 190,000.
As the Trump economy continues to grow beyond expectations of the experts, the unemployment rate hits new lows, and the unemployment rate for the historically most disadvantaged falls even faster than that for average workers, the irony continues. Whatever you may think of Trump the man, his policies have done more to help those groups liberals claim to want to help than any government handouts Obama delivered.

[zk]

[quote=EconProf]More good economic news: Unemployment compensation claims were predicted to come in at 233,000. Instead, they were 190,000.
As the Trump economy continues to grow beyond expectations of the experts, the unemployment rate hits new lows, and the unemployment rate for the historically most disadvantaged falls even faster than that for average workers, the irony continues. Whatever you may think of Trump the man, his policies have done more to help those groups liberals claim to want to help than any government handouts Obama delivered.[/quote]

Real economics professors are accused of being ensconced in their ivory towers.

Apparently, fake ones seclude themselves in an alternate reality and cling to any old made-up narrative that makes them feel good.

[spdrun]

If you’re “historically disadvantaged”, would you rather be stuck at a dead-end McJob or be given enough welfare/free insurance to be able to go to school and not have to take the McJob? Employment isn’t the full picture, sometimes quality of the job and social mobility matter as well.

[EconProf]

Let’s look more closely at the possibility of upward mobility for that “historically disadvantaged” youngster with a “deadend McJob” compared to one who takes government freebees.
He or she may be a minority, growing up poor, likely without a father present, going to a crap inner-city school with unionized teachers, and maybe has a run-in with the law on record.
Our booming economy forces employers to consider these previously-overlooked applicants. That first job exposes the youngster to valuable life-lessons for the first time: Be on time, dress well, be courteous, work hard whether you feel like it or not. Most of all, a weekly paycheck gives them pride of accomplishment. And that demanding boss may be the first father-figure they ever had.
That first job can be the bottom rung of the ladder where they advance within the company (many McDonalds managers started at the bottom) or can enable them to put something on their resume when they apply for a better job elsewhere.

[spdrun]

Here’s the thing: not everyone wants to end up being a middle manager at McDonarby King’s at 40. “Advancing within a company” isn’t a substitute for education and being able to actually choose one’s career, rather than being tracked into being a manager at a lard and grease slinger.

Go to France or certain other European countries — anyone with a high school diploma can start medical school, the bar to admission is very low. Work hard the first two years, pass exams, and you’re guaranteed to get into the next four years. Social mobility in the US is actually falling while it’s increasing in other countries.

As far as run-ins with the law, the liberal solution is better than the conservative one. Legalize some drugs, allow people to clear their records. Permissiveness trumps authoritarianism here, pun intended.

[FlyerInHi]

zk, I think econprof voted for Trump and he’s trying to rationalize his decision.

Trump is not conservative in any sense. In fact, he’s “refudiating” traditions that conservative hold dear. And in the process, Trump is destroying our institutions.

Anyway, I stopped caring about the grievances of his base in the rust belt. They can have him.

I just love it that Harley Davidson is moving production offshore to protect their European market share. I think that a real economist would have seen that coming.

[FlyerInHi]

[quote=spdrun] Social mobility in the US is actually falling while it’s increasing in other countries.
[/quote]

The US worker benefited from the post WWII boom. Other nations had to rebuild economies and institutions.

The average American worker is not very educated and knowledgeable. People in other countries are benefiting from globalization of education and leapfrogging Americans in knowledge. That’s the reason the majority of tech professionals are foreign born.

Pretty much tech and health care are the two private sectors of the economy providing real wage growth for salaried employees.

[Author]

Posts