Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So then why did they say during the election cylce that the market would go down if Trump's programs had those benefits?
Exactly! I'll leave it to each reader to do their own homework as to what was said prior to the election as to the market, but we all know what we kept hearing....that the market hates uncertainty, and will be going down under Trump, and up under Clinton. I did my own googling just now and it was unanimous in every link I checked, and I checked 8 or 10 mainstream sites.....down under Trump, and up under Clinton.
Now of course the media, who unarguably supported Clinton, lock, stock and barrel, are saying, "oh sure, it's up now, but it will come crashing down at some future point". Ok, maybe, but that's not what you said prior to the election.
The fact is it was a scare tactic. They truly either didn't know what was going to happen, or of course did know the market would go higher under Trump and didn't want to say that of course because that would have been a benefit to Trump. So, they are either guilty of lying, or literally spouting off a prediction when they literally had no idea what was really going to happen. Either way, their credibility is gone in my opinion.
This kind of reminds me of the global warming thing. Back in the 60's, when I was a kid they were getting us all scared due to the predicted "global cooling" and coming ice age. Then they switched to "global warming", and when that hasn't always worked out, now it's "global climate change"....which can literally mean anything at all, so they can't be proven wrong.
Now, I'm not one to doubt that something is going on with global warming, global cooling, or climate change, but all I ask if this. If you're not sure what exactly is going on, stop telling me you do! Admit you're perplexed, but something is happening, and we'll keep studying the issue. That's an honest and reasonable position to hold. The fear mongering should stop until we actually know what we're up against.
Last edited by jasper1372; 11-23-2016 at 10:55 AM..
I think Trump will wind up like Eisenhower; a socially moderate big government Republican.
What he will end up being is anyone's guess. Every day he changes his plan on something, but the direction seems to be big government, which is the opposite of what he was selling on the campaign trail. Maybe the reality is beginning to dawn on him. It will eventually dawn on his supporters too.
What he will end up being is anyone's guess. Every day he changes his plan on something, but the direction seems to be big government, which is the opposite of what he was selling on the campaign trail. Maybe the reality is beginning to dawn on him. It will eventually dawn on his supporters too.
We must have watched two different campaigns. I saw him promising more government left and right.
More infrastructure spending, more military spending, more surveillance, more internet regulation.
So then why did they say during the election cylce that the market would go down if Trump's programs had those benefits?
Well Trump isn't in office yet. Trump hasn't launched any policies yet. So what is happening right now is meaningless. No one knows what the longer term impact will be when he is actually in office. I am not very hopeful.
We must have watched two different campaigns. I saw him promising more government left and right.
More infrastructure spending, more military spending, more surveillance, more internet regulation.
It's why I didn't vote for him.
Yes, coming to think about it (the speeches), there was a lot of spending increases, and government expansion, etc but it was confused by all the anti-establishment talk.
Big government politics sold under the banner of anti-establishment.
Yes, coming to think about it (the speeches), there was a lot of spending increases, and government expansion, etc but it was confused by all the anti-establishment talk.
Big government politics sold under the banner of anti-establishment.
With Hillary? Sure, although Trumps plans clearly include much more spending without funding, and also Fed gov intervention in how States run their affairs.
With Hillary? Sure, although Trumps plans clearly include much more spending without funding, and also Fed gov intervention in how States run their affairs.
You were 100% wrong about everything you said as to why Trump wouldn't win the election. You are wrong again.
Dow is now about 19,000. Yet another false narrative destroyed.
You were 100% wrong about everything you said as to why Trump wouldn't win the election. You are wrong again.
Could you quote me saying Trump wouldn't win? Most of the year I said I didn't see how Hillary could win, and towards the end I said it could go either way.
If you think Trumps policies (unless he flip-flops, which seems to be the rule rather than exception) would NOT cause a recession, I'd say you don't know much about economics.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
