The stock market is not the economy. Also, you're factually wrong. Here ya go. I know you're not going to read it because it will distort your optical illusion.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wa.../05/01/the-stock-market-under-trump-vs-obama/
Is the Summit the biggest news this offseason?
- Thread starter lurkeraspect84
- Start date
The stock market is not the economy. Also, you're factually wrong. Here ya go. I know you're not going to read it because it will distort your optical illusion.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wa.../05/01/the-stock-market-under-trump-vs-obama/
So predictable. Think it's weird that the market jumped immediately after Trump won the election? What was driving the immediate gains in the economy and stock market? Answer the question. Don't dodge it.
More jobs. More GDP growth. More market growth. Your boy Obama didn't do anything bruh. Isn't he the first president to NOT get 3% GDP growth? Lol. Yeah, real awesome work Obuma.
Taking a stand for them yet hurting them at the same time. Interesting.
How so? Any harm will be short term. The goal is to quit having our "friends" take advantage of us, return the favor or quit doing business with them all together. It benefits them to fix their end more than it does us to leave ot the way it is.
What size hat would you like Q? I'm gonna buy you a Make America Great Again hat. You'll love it. You'll get a good six years out of that thing. Enjoy!
I thought it was 2.5% for German cars in the US? Is it 4% now?
Also, what's your source for the 90% VAT on US cars sold in Germany? A search didn't find a reference, and VAT in Germany ranges from 7% to 19%. There's a 19% import VAT that is waived if certain residency conditions are met (i.e. you're intending to live in Germany as a resident), and is equal to the regular VAT that people pay for goods bought within Germany, including German cars manufactured in Germany. Basically, from what I'm reading from the German government website, it appears to be similar to how sales tax laws work here when bringing goods from one state to another and is intended to avoid sales tax shenanigans: if you buy within Germany, German VAT at 19%; if you buy non-EU 19% VAT; if you buy non-EU and intend to establish residency, fee (maybe) waived; if you buy non-German EU, fee reimbursed to the extent that you paid VAT in the other EU country (i.e. if you paid 15%, then you get a credit for that amount).
I can see how military contractors can get screwed by this (military has VAT waiver/reimbursement), or other temporary residents bringing a car in, but is it really a tariff issue? And even if it is (it's not), 19% is a faaaaar cray from 90%. So I guess I'm just asking for a source aside from your own expertise.
How certain are you that we're being taken advantage of?
Obviously can't hang in the conversation. Typical uninformed lib. Bashing Trump optics.
SNU works in an economic field and his experience in that field shows when talking to a simpleton like Q. One of the more one sided debates I’ve seen on this forum.
That was the appropriate response. You didn't read the article proving you wrong. So I'm good.
Is that true? We've had some real dildos in office over the years and for him to be the first says something.
It absolutely says A LOT about Obama's leadership (or lack there of).
How do you feel about the unemployment rate dropping to 3.8%?
Also, I looked at the S&P numbers. Here's the data I found:
Trump:
Jan 2017: 2,275.12
Jun 2018: 2,786.73
Change: 22.49% Increase
Obama:
Jan 2009: 865.58
Jun 2010: 1083.36
Change: 25.16% Increase
While the increase was slightly higher with Obama, it wasn't significantly higher. Also, our economy had tanked when Obama took office. It's like taking over the 10-win 2016 76ers. Increasing 25% really isn't that impressive - that puts you at 12.5 wins. If you take over a 41-41 team and increase your win total by 22.49%, you'd be looking at 50 wins (which is more what it looks like for Trump).
Also, the last 17 months for Obama only saw an 11.53% increase.
Aug 2015: 2,039.87
Jan 2017: 2,275.12
Increase: 11.53%
I'm not here to say a President has much control over an economy, because they obviously don't. There are simply too many variables. But when you're taxed less, it makes sense that there's more money going back into businesses, which is where real growth occurs.
Define "nothing". Just them meeting is quite a big deal. Were you expecting world peace, end of hunger, etc?
Did Gorbachev make concessions in one day? Pretty sure it took the Soviet Union something like two years before anything concrete was made. You don't make material movements in one day. That's not how geopolitics works.
I have my doubts, admittedly. I mean, who can really trust Kim Jong-un? It kind of seems like a front, but I'll remain cautiously optimistic. If we can denuclearize that country, it is a sign of great, great progress.
Are trade deficits inherently bad? Not necessarily. See, e.g., Cato Institute; Forbes. Google: host of other articles and research on the issue.
The case to make is why these particular trade deficits are bad, or what particular aspects of these particular trade deficits are bad. But this is handy graphic to know what the trade deficits are, so thanks for that!
Last year, President Trump praised Harley-Davidson as a “great example” of a company creating U.S. jobs. But soon after, the company started a series of layoffs including 118 U.S. workers in April, followed by another 180 in July.
What part of 3.8% unemployment do you not understand?
How about having the lowest unemployment rate since December 2000?
Surely someone as well versed in economics as yourself will recall what happened in 2008-2009. Some people have presented some nice comparison numbers and all, but without context they're nigh meaningless. In other words, the economy is complex. If you're going to make the case on either side, it's got to be better than comparing S&P growth rates without context, which is roughly the equivalent of saying Loyola Maramount had the best offense ever because LOOK AT THESE PER GAME SCORING NUMBERS!
That's not because of lower taxes or Trump, which no one can point to a single policy that is a direct result. You do know unemployment has been going down since 2010, once the recession ended, right?
OK, time to change the title of the thread to something all-encompassing and dickish. You got 'em brawling up in here!
I certainly don't disagree. Just making some quick points to Q while he was spewing bullshit. Happy to dive into a real discussion on the economics, markets, etc. with anyone on a real level. Q is a racist liberal troll. I don't believe he would understand even if I fully explained everything to him.
Yeah 300 people is a lot of people. Guess Trump doesn't care about those people, huh?
"Socially sensitive comics only"?OK, time to change the title of the thread to something all-encompassing and dickish. You got 'em brawling up in here!
That's comical coming from a right wing racist nut job! But please, have that discussion. Let's see what ya got.
Would you not rather see that money go towards infrastructure or deficit? If you are selling it to me as not such a bad thing, can I sell it to you as not such a good thing?
Wow! You calling people who got laid off after their company received a tax break a snowflake? Just wow! But De Niro said it best!
