3 ms·

> The US market being down (temporarily) is a good thing for America - it lowers bond rates and makes it much easier to manage the out of control national debt.

by lovich 2y ago

> The US market being down (temporarily) is a good thing for America - it lowers bond rates and makes it much easier to manage the out of control national debt. This is a good thing for investor confidence in the long term. Can you stop lying to yourself and to our faces? How can you claim that a this is 1: temporary 2: if it is temporary this is a good thing because it will make debt repayments easier 3: (the part you may disagree with, but I’d give you the same consideration as someone telling me the sky was actually neon pink usually) national debt payments take longer to pan out than a “temporary” down market

simne 2y ago
I have interest and hard question for you. Please read carefully and answer very seriously. 1. It is obvious, Trump moves lead to shrink federal govt spending and with high probability could shrink national debt and lower taxes. 2. It is obvious, after market shrink could be great grow, because market economy tends to expansion, and it will be even better because lowered debt. 3. It is not so obvious, but after great wars, like in Ukraine now, appear large demographic problems, so significant grow could begin only after demography will return to health state. So questions are: 1. Do you think, Trump administration could so much affect demography, so it could brake market down? How this could be done in US? 2. If you are not considering significant demographic problems, please explain, from where you considering market brake?
- simne 2y ago
  Sorry, I made typo: meaning dawn, not down. But questions still same.
- acdha 2y ago
  > with high probability could shrink national debt and lower taxes. Lowering taxes for at least some people is a given, but he raised the debt by $5T last time and the proposed budget this time around is similarly raising the deficit further. Serious deficit reduction is not a “high probability” without some convincing reversal.
  - simne 2y ago
    > he raised the debt by $5T last time and the proposed budget this time around is similarly raising the deficit further Could you provide links to respectable non-subjective sources?
    - acdha 2y ago
      Even before the pandemic, he was slated to significantly increase the deficit. The CBO had predicted $2T in 2017 but even by 2018 they had updated the deficit predictions by several trillion dollars because the Republican spending increases were paired with lower growth in revenue. https://www.cbo.gov/publication/53651 https://www.cbo.gov/publication/53651 https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/03/12/trump-vowed-eliminate-debt-years-hes-track-leave-it-least-percent-higher/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/03/12/trump-vow... This time around, they’re looking at additional tax cuts which would only increase the deficit rate. We don’t have a final plan yet but there’s no sign of willingness needed to restore tax rates to anything like previous levels, which is the only way to make the math work: https://apnews.com/article/cbo-budget-outlook-treasury-26b1fc8a13af4537b72660c4a478dd97 https://apnews.com/article/cbo-budget-outlook-treasury-26b1f... > Trump’s proposed extension of his 2017 tax cuts that are set to expire after this year along with new cuts could easily exceed $4 trillion
      - simne 2y ago
        > before the pandemic I'm sorry for misunderstanding, but I sure, asked about current Trump policy, not about nearly 10 years ago. - 2000s was one case; 2010s was another case; 2020s are totally new case. And what I really seen on previous Trump, and see now, he is like a burning flame, really looking like he want to do something great. BTW, if you want to remember pandemic, I remember nearly best was Germany chancellor Merkel, but what make me curios, she retired just few months before Russia began war against Ukraine. So I want to see considerations relevant for current case. Thank you.
        acdha 2y ago
        You can’t just ignore his first term: not only is that debt still here but the reason this is coming up in every conversation now is that the 2017 tax cuts were justified on two grounds - that greater economic growth would make up for the losses (the opposite happened) and that tax rates would return to previous levels in 2025. That places Republicans in an even harder position because simply preserving the TCJA rates makes it impossible to avoid taking on trillions in new debt and they’re trying to make deeper cuts (see my previous comment). There’s no way to make those numbers work without massive cuts to Medicare and the military, or taking on huge amounts of debt. They had originally been hoping to make this a problem for whoever became president after Trump’s second term but Biden winning in 2020 means they have to deal with it, or simply pretend they never cared about debt. Currently they’re trying to see if they can get away with new accounting methods to produce better-sounding numbers: https://www.barrons.com/articles/lutnick-government-spending-gdp-calculation-economy-aaa2b8c6 https://www.barrons.com/articles/lutnick-government-spending...

by lovich 2y ago

simne 2y ago

I have interest and hard question for you. Please read carefully and answer very seriously. 1. It is obvious, Trump moves lead to shrink federal govt spending and with high probability could shrink national debt and lower taxes. 2. It is obvious, after market shrink could be great grow, because market economy tends to expansion, and it will be even better because lowered debt. 3. It is not so obvious, but after great wars, like in Ukraine now, appear large demographic problems, so significant grow could begin only after demography will return to health state. So questions are: 1. Do you think, Trump administration could so much affect demography, so it could brake market down? How this could be done in US? 2. If you are not considering significant demographic problems, please explain, from where you considering market brake?

simne 2y ago
Sorry, I made typo: meaning dawn, not down. But questions still same.
acdha 2y ago
> with high probability could shrink national debt and lower taxes. Lowering taxes for at least some people is a given, but he raised the debt by $5T last time and the proposed budget this time around is similarly raising the deficit further. Serious deficit reduction is not a “high probability” without some convincing reversal.
- simne 2y ago
  > he raised the debt by $5T last time and the proposed budget this time around is similarly raising the deficit further Could you provide links to respectable non-subjective sources?
  - acdha 2y ago
    Even before the pandemic, he was slated to significantly increase the deficit. The CBO had predicted $2T in 2017 but even by 2018 they had updated the deficit predictions by several trillion dollars because the Republican spending increases were paired with lower growth in revenue. https://www.cbo.gov/publication/53651 https://www.cbo.gov/publication/53651 https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/03/12/trump-vowed-eliminate-debt-years-hes-track-leave-it-least-percent-higher/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/03/12/trump-vow... This time around, they’re looking at additional tax cuts which would only increase the deficit rate. We don’t have a final plan yet but there’s no sign of willingness needed to restore tax rates to anything like previous levels, which is the only way to make the math work: https://apnews.com/article/cbo-budget-outlook-treasury-26b1fc8a13af4537b72660c4a478dd97 https://apnews.com/article/cbo-budget-outlook-treasury-26b1f... > Trump’s proposed extension of his 2017 tax cuts that are set to expire after this year along with new cuts could easily exceed $4 trillion
    - simne 2y ago
      > before the pandemic I'm sorry for misunderstanding, but I sure, asked about current Trump policy, not about nearly 10 years ago. - 2000s was one case; 2010s was another case; 2020s are totally new case. And what I really seen on previous Trump, and see now, he is like a burning flame, really looking like he want to do something great. BTW, if you want to remember pandemic, I remember nearly best was Germany chancellor Merkel, but what make me curios, she retired just few months before Russia began war against Ukraine. So I want to see considerations relevant for current case. Thank you.
      - acdha 2y ago
        You can’t just ignore his first term: not only is that debt still here but the reason this is coming up in every conversation now is that the 2017 tax cuts were justified on two grounds - that greater economic growth would make up for the losses (the opposite happened) and that tax rates would return to previous levels in 2025. That places Republicans in an even harder position because simply preserving the TCJA rates makes it impossible to avoid taking on trillions in new debt and they’re trying to make deeper cuts (see my previous comment). There’s no way to make those numbers work without massive cuts to Medicare and the military, or taking on huge amounts of debt. They had originally been hoping to make this a problem for whoever became president after Trump’s second term but Biden winning in 2020 means they have to deal with it, or simply pretend they never cared about debt. Currently they’re trying to see if they can get away with new accounting methods to produce better-sounding numbers: https://www.barrons.com/articles/lutnick-government-spending-gdp-calculation-economy-aaa2b8c6 https://www.barrons.com/articles/lutnick-government-spending...