|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On July 31 2020 07:07 HelpMeGetBetter wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2020 03:03 mierin wrote:
I think it's hardly a coincidence that he (or his handlers) picked today to make the delay the election comment. Was it to distract from the John Lewis funeral? or to distract from documents about to be released regarding Ghislaine Maxwell? or something else? I'll take a 100 on C: The biggest GDP drop in more then a century.
The one thing Trump could run on was the economy. And Covid has completely shot that plan to hell.
|
On July 31 2020 06:12 Danglars wrote:
I’ve basically said all I wanted to on this, and repetition would be meaningless. He can’t even remove an Obama executive order, nor even keep the base that elected him intact, and I have to suffer through ALL CAPS warnings on the prospect of takeover. All evidence to the contrary, some people will have their far right worries, and some people see Antifa/far left groups in Portland and assume the city will fall, and some libertarians think America’s already toast from the debt or invasion of liberties (thankfully, not Wegandi). It’s a type.
I’ll make the comparisons I choose, particularly in apocalyptic doom from both sides, and didn’t/will not call you a fascist.
Call it apocalyptic doomsaying if you want, but in my opinion, people who call out the early warning signs of fascism should be commended, not told to shut up.
There's a difference between wearing a sandwich board proclaiming "The End Is Nigh!" and saying "Hey guys, this seems an awful lot like what Hitler did, should we be careful?"
The fact is - it's happened before and it can happen again. Respect to the vigilant, beware to the complacent.
|
Been ringing that bell since before Trump got elected, they aren't going to listen until it is too late imo.
|
|
|
To be fair, the system is totally warped and completely messed up. In order to have any hope of restructuring (beyond violent revolution) we will need political leadership that is at least mildly deferential to reality.
|
Always nice to have danglars defending another stupid tweet. I don't see a "he's senile" or "deranged", just calling out the mass "hysteria". Cool.
Any thoughts on the tulsa rally killings ? Our "hysteria" that time was met with your criticism wasn't it ?
|
On July 31 2020 10:18 Arghmyliver wrote:
To be fair, the system is totally warped and completely messed up. In order to have any hope of restructuring (beyond violent revolution) we will need political leadership that is at least mildly deferential to reality.
You must be new. We don't have time for that change to occur. According to a lot of people here and the science, we're behind the curve drastically that pretty much there is nothing we can do unless we have a revolution on a global scale where the proles rise up and murder the bourgeoisie.
|
On July 31 2020 10:40 Erasme wrote:
Always nice to have danglars defending another stupid tweet. I don't see a "he's senile" or "deranged", just calling out the mass "hysteria". Cool.
Any thoughts on the tulsa rally killings ? Our "hysteria" that time was met with your criticism wasn't it ?
It's nice to hear people confusing apocalyptic predictions in light of his tweet with a defense of his tweet. Yes yes, criticizing the Hitler comparisons means you're defending the act. Much wisdom, great understanding.
|
On July 31 2020 10:18 Arghmyliver wrote:
To be fair, the system is totally warped and completely messed up. In order to have any hope of restructuring (beyond violent revolution) we will need political leadership that is at least mildly deferential to reality.
Unfortunately, until we somehow get a libertarian leadership, things will continue to be very bleak.
|
On July 31 2020 11:55 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2020 10:40 Erasme wrote:
Always nice to have danglars defending another stupid tweet. I don't see a "he's senile" or "deranged", just calling out the mass "hysteria". Cool.
Any thoughts on the tulsa rally killings ? Our "hysteria" that time was met with your criticism wasn't it ? It's nice to hear people confusing apocalyptic predictions in light of his tweet with a defense of his tweet. Yes yes, criticizing the Hitler comparisons means you're defending the act. Much wisdom, great understanding.
Nice of you to cherry pick that one but not unusual xd
No comments on the second part tho ? Wish I could call them tulsa rally murders, but they signed a death waiver much wisdom
|
On July 31 2020 12:11 Erasme wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2020 11:55 Danglars wrote:On July 31 2020 10:40 Erasme wrote:
Always nice to have danglars defending another stupid tweet. I don't see a "he's senile" or "deranged", just calling out the mass "hysteria". Cool.
Any thoughts on the tulsa rally killings ? Our "hysteria" that time was met with your criticism wasn't it ? It's nice to hear people confusing apocalyptic predictions in light of his tweet with a defense of his tweet. Yes yes, criticizing the Hitler comparisons means you're defending the act. Much wisdom, great understanding. Nice of you to cherry pick that one but not unusual xd No comments on the second part tho ? Wish I could call them tulsa rally murders, but they signed a death waiver much wisdom
I don't hear a defense of ignoring the apocalyptic part to call it "defending." If you won't stop lying, I have little reason to even recognize your post. I have little time, and some posts of mine have literally 7 people quote replying to them. So let's move beyond whatever motivates pretending Trump has the power to suspend or delay elections.
It's like someone needs to throw a class on recognizing there are bad things in this world that aren't overthrowing the existing nation-state transition of power, and knowing the system will endure is not endorsement of the bad things.
|
Question for someone more attentive to the report than I am: that >30% drop in GDP in the US, does that lowered GDP include the money spent by the government as stimulus on checks, unemployment, etc? Fed loan money? I know "government spending" is generally considered to be a portion of GDP but in practice the calculation has been really tricky for me to parse.
|
On July 31 2020 12:58 LegalLord wrote:
Question for someone more attentive to the report than I am: that >30% drop in GDP in the US, does that lowered GDP include the money spent by the government as stimulus on checks, unemployment, etc? Fed loan money? I know "government spending" is generally considered to be a portion of GDP but in practice the calculation has been really tricky for me to parse.
That would be really bad if it was counted and still that bad right? I mean it's really unfathomably bad already but worse?
|
On July 31 2020 12:58 LegalLord wrote:
Question for someone more attentive to the report than I am: that >30% drop in GDP in the US, does that lowered GDP include the money spent by the government as stimulus on checks, unemployment, etc? Fed loan money? I know "government spending" is generally considered to be a portion of GDP but in practice the calculation has been really tricky for me to parse.
Generally speaking - yes. The >30% in GDP in the U.S. does take into account stimulus programs, unless 100% of that money is saved "under a mattress" for a rainy day which obviously isnt the case, especially since some of the fiscal policies employed by the Fed have definitively been used to inject liquidity in the form of overnight repos for example.
The ability of central banks to boost the calculated GDP in this way is one of the biggest defenses of central banking and easy money policy to begin with, something that Austrian economists correctly identify as a sham.
The fact that the calculated GDP dropped this much despite multiple fiscal nukes is bad, bad news regarding the economy.
|
I also want to point out that GDP is not a be all, end all method of assessing the economy; and in fact has many flaws. It's a tool of Keynesians for the most part, which is why its such a highlighted calculation, that ignores many important factors.
For example, as I already stated, mere increases in money supply would suggest a strengthening economy if we assume that the economy can be accurately expressed through GDP.
Then there is the fact that GDP favors trade surplus rather than deficit, when the fact of the matter is that a trade deficit, meaning an INFLUX of capital, is generally superior. Which is why Trump's trade war with china is actually deleterious the US economy - WE were the one benefiting from the trade deficit.
I don't like using GDP to judge an economy but when you have an unprecedented >30% drop in the context of Fed pulling out the biggest fiscal guns in world history, it's a red flag that cannot be ignored.
|
On July 31 2020 14:19 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2020 12:58 LegalLord wrote:
Question for someone more attentive to the report than I am: that >30% drop in GDP in the US, does that lowered GDP include the money spent by the government as stimulus on checks, unemployment, etc? Fed loan money? I know "government spending" is generally considered to be a portion of GDP but in practice the calculation has been really tricky for me to parse. That would be really bad if it was counted and still that bad right? I mean it's really unfathomably bad already but worse?
Indeed. And I admit that my understanding of GDP is a little bit fuzzy since it's fairly complex to calculate and not something I've looked at in a while, but my expectation would be that we'd see GDP include:
1. The stimulus check
2. Unemployment, including the boosted one
3. Salaries bankrolled by the paycheck protection programs
4. Probably NOT the giant stack of loans handed out by Congress and the Fed, but maybe some portion of this is a contributor?
The numbers basically say, this quarter we only had $4 trillion of economy instead of $6 trillion. Maybe the reality is that we have a trillion less than that, but we just borrowed the difference.
And yeah, right there is at least one data point to suggest GDP as an imperfect measure of "the economy." But it's far more real than other measures, such as the stock market, that have often been used to claim economic health.
|
On July 31 2020 15:30 LegalLord wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2020 14:19 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 31 2020 12:58 LegalLord wrote:
Question for someone more attentive to the report than I am: that >30% drop in GDP in the US, does that lowered GDP include the money spent by the government as stimulus on checks, unemployment, etc? Fed loan money? I know "government spending" is generally considered to be a portion of GDP but in practice the calculation has been really tricky for me to parse. That would be really bad if it was counted and still that bad right? I mean it's really unfathomably bad already but worse? Indeed. And I admit that my understanding of GDP is a little bit fuzzy since it's fairly complex to calculate and not something I've looked at in a while, but my expectation would be that we'd see GDP include: 1. The stimulus check 2. Unemployment, including the boosted one 3. Salaries bankrolled by the paycheck protection programs 4. Probably NOT the giant stack of loans handed out by Congress and the Fed, but maybe some portion of this is a contributor? The numbers basically say, this quarter we only had $4 trillion of economy instead of $6 trillion. Maybe the reality is that we have a trillion less than that, but we just borrowed the difference. And yeah, right there is at least one data point to suggest GDP as an imperfect measure of "the economy." But it's far more real than other measures, such as the stock market, that have often been used to claim economic health.
The 32.9% is an annualized value. It was 9.5% less in the quarter!
|
On July 31 2020 15:38 mahrgell wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2020 15:30 LegalLord wrote:On July 31 2020 14:19 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 31 2020 12:58 LegalLord wrote:
Question for someone more attentive to the report than I am: that >30% drop in GDP in the US, does that lowered GDP include the money spent by the government as stimulus on checks, unemployment, etc? Fed loan money? I know "government spending" is generally considered to be a portion of GDP but in practice the calculation has been really tricky for me to parse. That would be really bad if it was counted and still that bad right? I mean it's really unfathomably bad already but worse? Indeed. And I admit that my understanding of GDP is a little bit fuzzy since it's fairly complex to calculate and not something I've looked at in a while, but my expectation would be that we'd see GDP include: 1. The stimulus check 2. Unemployment, including the boosted one 3. Salaries bankrolled by the paycheck protection programs 4. Probably NOT the giant stack of loans handed out by Congress and the Fed, but maybe some portion of this is a contributor? The numbers basically say, this quarter we only had $4 trillion of economy instead of $6 trillion. Maybe the reality is that we have a trillion less than that, but we just borrowed the difference. And yeah, right there is at least one data point to suggest GDP as an imperfect measure of "the economy." But it's far more real than other measures, such as the stock market, that have often been used to claim economic health. The 32.9% is an annualized value. It was 9.5% less in the quarter!
I assume that was sarcasm?
|
On July 31 2020 15:43 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2020 15:38 mahrgell wrote:On July 31 2020 15:30 LegalLord wrote:On July 31 2020 14:19 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 31 2020 12:58 LegalLord wrote:
Question for someone more attentive to the report than I am: that >30% drop in GDP in the US, does that lowered GDP include the money spent by the government as stimulus on checks, unemployment, etc? Fed loan money? I know "government spending" is generally considered to be a portion of GDP but in practice the calculation has been really tricky for me to parse. That would be really bad if it was counted and still that bad right? I mean it's really unfathomably bad already but worse? Indeed. And I admit that my understanding of GDP is a little bit fuzzy since it's fairly complex to calculate and not something I've looked at in a while, but my expectation would be that we'd see GDP include: 1. The stimulus check 2. Unemployment, including the boosted one 3. Salaries bankrolled by the paycheck protection programs 4. Probably NOT the giant stack of loans handed out by Congress and the Fed, but maybe some portion of this is a contributor? The numbers basically say, this quarter we only had $4 trillion of economy instead of $6 trillion. Maybe the reality is that we have a trillion less than that, but we just borrowed the difference. And yeah, right there is at least one data point to suggest GDP as an imperfect measure of "the economy." But it's far more real than other measures, such as the stock market, that have often been used to claim economic health. The 32.9% is an annualized value. It was 9.5% less in the quarter! I assume that was sarcasm?
What makes you think so?
The numbers basically say, this quarter we only had $4 trillion of economy instead of $6 trillion.
This should be 5.4 ...
And that was all I'm saying.
|
On July 31 2020 15:54 mahrgell wrote:Show nested quote +On July 31 2020 15:43 Simberto wrote:On July 31 2020 15:38 mahrgell wrote:On July 31 2020 15:30 LegalLord wrote:On July 31 2020 14:19 GreenHorizons wrote:On July 31 2020 12:58 LegalLord wrote:
Question for someone more attentive to the report than I am: that >30% drop in GDP in the US, does that lowered GDP include the money spent by the government as stimulus on checks, unemployment, etc? Fed loan money? I know "government spending" is generally considered to be a portion of GDP but in practice the calculation has been really tricky for me to parse. That would be really bad if it was counted and still that bad right? I mean it's really unfathomably bad already but worse? Indeed. And I admit that my understanding of GDP is a little bit fuzzy since it's fairly complex to calculate and not something I've looked at in a while, but my expectation would be that we'd see GDP include: 1. The stimulus check 2. Unemployment, including the boosted one 3. Salaries bankrolled by the paycheck protection programs 4. Probably NOT the giant stack of loans handed out by Congress and the Fed, but maybe some portion of this is a contributor? The numbers basically say, this quarter we only had $4 trillion of economy instead of $6 trillion. Maybe the reality is that we have a trillion less than that, but we just borrowed the difference. And yeah, right there is at least one data point to suggest GDP as an imperfect measure of "the economy." But it's far more real than other measures, such as the stock market, that have often been used to claim economic health. The 32.9% is an annualized value. It was 9.5% less in the quarter! I assume that was sarcasm? What makes you think so? Show nested quote +The numbers basically say, this quarter we only had $4 trillion of economy instead of $6 trillion. This should be 5.4 ... And that was all I'm saying.
Then the numbers do something else then i would expect them to do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
