Voters overwhelmingly think Trump is making the economy worse (FOX poll)

[Hawkeye10]

Trump claimed crazy numbers for inflation when Biden was in office. Now his economy may be a lot worse than we have been told. Trump will lie the other direction now. He does not seek the truth. The people must not know what he is doing.

The government numbers have been fiction for years.

 

[cawacko]

We had as many rounds as we needed to get to 2% target inflation. With inflation and deflation, you either catch it early, or you have to do ten times more to get rid of it. So had we allowed deflation to stay a little, it would have meant a lot more to get rid of it.

And even with the multiple rounds we were not firmly at 2% yet.


We have made the mistake of leaving jobs half done in the past. What happens is that you lose everything, and it takes a lot more to get things going again. You either get it done, or you fail.

In other words, those additional rounds were more necessary than the original rounds. Maybe things would have bounced back without any intervention. It is extremely unlikely, but possible. Once the Fed intervened, they absolutely had to see it through.


One bank failed... And that bank did not fail until the pandemic, so that also played a part. I am just not seeing that great of side effects.

And that is the oddest part of it all. We did not get extreme side effects.


By withdrawing it slowly, the Fed reconditioned markets to survive without the support.

The end of the support fed right into the pandemic, and the beginning of the support, so it is hard to tell how bad it would have been... But it was not.

You’ve shifted your definitions more than once. First it was low rates mean a bad economy, then it was deflation versus recession, now it’s that multiple QE rounds were somehow more necessary than the first. That’s why I don’t buy the neat partisan framing.

And I don’t see how you can say the side effects weren’t real. It wasn’t just about whether a bank failed. QE and ZIRP drove asset prices up and forced investors to chase yield. That’s how we ended up with institutions buying single-family homes, credit markets stretched, and markets throwing a fit at the first sign of tapering. You can argue the Fed had to keep going, but the distortions along the way were real. And since wealthier households hold most financial assets, the gains flowed to the top while the middle class was left dealing with distorted housing and debt markets. Inequality widened as a result.

 

[Tbird19482]

Trump claimed crazy numbers for inflation when Biden was in office. Now his economy may be a lot worse than we have been told. Trump will lie the other direction now. He does not seek the truth. The people must not know what he is doing.

IMO it is another one of his look over here while I do something else over there.
He is loving all the hype the Krik killing and the media mess he is making so nobody pays attention to what the economy is doing and going into the dumps.

 

[cawacko]

IMO it is another one of his look over here while I do something else over there.
He is loving all the hype the Krik killing and the media mess he is making so nobody pays attention to what the economy is doing and going into the dumps.

Actually, I’d argue otherwise. Not everyone’s life revolves around politics day-to-day. But people do pay attention to are the cost of goods, gas and living overall, and how are they feeling as a household.

Partisans love to downplay these things. Look at inflation during the Biden years, when Democrats argued it wasn’t that bad or wasn’t Biden’s fault. Voters still noticed. The same will happen with Trump and Republicans, people won’t ignore how the economy feels to them.

 

[Tbird19482]

Actually, I’d argue otherwise. Not everyone’s life revolves around politics day-to-day. But people do pay attention to are the cost of goods, gas and living overall, and how are they feeling as a household.

Partisans love to downplay these things. Look at inflation during the Biden years, when Democrats argued it wasn’t that bad or wasn’t Biden’s fault. Voters still noticed. The same will happen with Trump and Republicans, people won’t ignore how the economy feels to them.

I sure hope they wake up soon.

 

[Walt]

First it was low rates mean a bad economy, then it was deflation versus recession

You made two mistakes there. First I said the central bank pushes down rates because it believes there is an economic problem. If the rates are low organically, that is a different matter. There are two main reasons for the Fed to push rates unusually low, to fight a recession or deflation. It is not versus anything there. Both reasons would be bad for the economy, but deflation is an empire killer.

now it’s that multiple QE rounds were somehow more necessary than the first.

Again, not exactly what I said. Once you start doing quantitive easing, you must finish it. Doing it halfway, and then pulling out means that it will not be effective later when you try to do it. So do it till it is complete, or do not do it, but never do it halfway.

That’s why I don’t buy the neat partisan framing.

The pathetic part of this is that basic monetary policy used to be bipartisan. Quantitive easing came from the Republicans, and I support it even though I am not a Republican.

And I don’t see how you can say the side effects weren’t real

I did not say that. I am saying the side effects were surprising small considering the huge nature of the solution. A lot of what you point to as "side effects" were actually the original problem.

QE and ZIRP drove asset prices up and forced investors to chase yield.

And that is why the bond market failed... Except the bond market did not fail. So the next question becomes why not?

That’s how we ended up with institutions buying single-family homes

Institutions buy houses because they are undervalued, not overvalued. In America at least, they have proven to be very bad at buying single family houses at a profit.

More renting would be better for the economy. Owning a house means Americans are locked into a local economy, when moving might allow them to be more productive. It locks their money into one kind of investment, that they will have trouble selling when they retire, because they will want to live there. It encourages them to vote against growth, to try to push up their house's value.

markets throwing a fit at the first sign of tapering

Part of the problem with the taper tantrum of 2013 was it was so sudden. With forward guidance, there have not been taper tantrums since then. So it is not an issue at the first sign as you claim.

The taper tantrum was not that bad. The economy continued to grow. Bond rates did not even go to neutral. The worst was that it hurt foreign bond sales... We are not Turkey.

 

[cawacko]

You made two mistakes there. First I said the central bank pushes down rates because it believes there is an economic problem. If the rates are low organically, that is a different matter. There are two main reasons for the Fed to push rates unusually low, to fight a recession or deflation. It is not versus anything there. Both reasons would be bad for the economy, but deflation is an empire killer.


Again, not exactly what I said. Once you start doing quantitive easing, you must finish it. Doing it halfway, and then pulling out means that it will not be effective later when you try to do it. So do it till it is complete, or do not do it, but never do it halfway.


The pathetic part of this is that basic monetary policy used to be bipartisan. Quantitive easing came from the Republicans, and I support it even though I am not a Republican.


I did not say that. I am saying the side effects were surprising small considering the huge nature of the solution. A lot of what you point to as "side effects" were actually the original problem.


And that is why the bond market failed... Except the bond market did not fail. So the next question becomes why not?


Institutions buy houses because they are undervalued, not overvalued. In America at least, they have proven to be very bad at buying single family houses at a profit.

More renting would be better for the economy. Owning a house means Americans are locked into a local economy, when moving might allow them to be more productive. It locks their money into one kind of investment, that they will have trouble selling when they retire, because they will want to live there. It encourages them to vote against growth, to try to push up their house's value.


Part of the problem with the taper tantrum of 2013 was it was so sudden. With forward guidance, there have not been taper tantrums since then. So it is not an issue at the first sign as you claim.

The taper tantrum was not that bad. The economy continued to grow. Bond rates did not even go to neutral. The worst was that it hurt foreign bond sales... We are not Turkey.

You’ve shifted your ground a few times in this thread. First it was that low rates mean a bad economy. Then it became that cuts are only for recessions or deflation. Now it’s that multiple rounds of QE weren’t optional because once you start you have to finish. That’s exactly why I don’t buy the framing. The definitions keep moving to fit the moment.

Side effects weren’t as “surprisingly small” as you’re making them out to be. QE and ZIRP pushed asset prices higher, forced investors to chase yield, and yes, helped create the environment where institutions piled into single-family housing. That’s not some abstract talking point. It had real consequences for households dealing with distorted markets and affordability.

The taper tantrum is another example. You can call it “not that bad,” but markets clearly showed how dependent they had become on stimulus. That kind of reaction is itself proof of distortion.

Since you view everything through partisanship, you can’t keep your definitions or positions consistent.