[Unthinking Majority]

@blackjack21
The stock market is not the economy though. I wouldn’t use it as a metric of how great things are going.
Which is why in the blog the person uses metrics As a peoxy to the tendency of profit to fall Globally instead of trends on the stock market.
At most the wealthy stock market traders observe or have someone observe the economy to make decisions about their stocks. But stocks can go up as it sucks for the average worker in some industry.

The stock market is a valuation of all publicly traded companies in the economy. It doesn't make any comment on the inequality or equality of worker incomes or conditions or happiness of workers, because that's not its function.

[Wellsy]

The stock market is a valuation of all publicly traded companies in the economy. It doesn't make any comment on the inequality or equality of worker incomes or conditions or happiness of workers, because that's not its function.

Regardless, one would still be a fool for equating the stock market with the economy and thus use it as a proxy of the economies health and direction.
The stock market can have signs of doing fine in many areas whilst the economy itself has signs of not doing so well. So to equate the stock market as a great indicator in itself of the overall health of the economy seems crude and problematic.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-economy-is-a-mess-so-why-isnt-the-stock-market/amp/

[Unthinking Majority]

Regardless, one would still be a fool for equating the stock market with the economy and thus use it as a proxy of the economies health and direction.
The stock market can have signs of doing fine in many areas whilst the economy itself has signs of not doing so well. So to equate the stock market as a great indicator in itself of the overall health of the economy seems crude and problematic.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-economy-is-a-mess-so-why-isnt-the-stock-market/amp/

I think using the stock market as an overall gauge has problems. It's just one tool that only measures certain things.

It's not telling you the health of the economy it's telling you the current value of publicly traded companies.

[blackjack21]

Exactly. When I made the comment about Trump's Liberalism in the Socio-Cultural sense that by no means voids his Nationalism/Populism. He's not going to ''Conserve'' anything worthwhile, and Conservatives would do well to reflect on that. As much as I completely enjoy seeing Liberals lose their minds over this man, I reflect that over time and once he wins a second term ''Conservatives'' are likely to be losing their minds over him as well.

Agreed. That's why I say supporting Trump isn't so much about who he is, but about who he is not.

So to be clear; Trump will win. But then we're going to have to take stock of the direction everything is going after that.

Yeah, I think who succeeds him in the Republican party will be interesting. Mike Pence is conservative, but establishmentarian and he has the personality of a wall flower. I also think that in the space of this "cultural revolution" that nobody asked for, Republicans who are not culture warriors seem rather weak. It's as if they only think about taxes, spending, military budget and that's about it--maybe abortion too. Yet, they don't seem to have any appetite for a cultural fight, and Trump is rather good at sparring with his opponents.

No doubt in my mind that what Trump has told the IRS he earned is something different from what he told banks.

That's a common practice though. Corporations often have two sets of books for taxes and for GAAP.

Do you think it is a coincidence that all of the sudden, right now, William Bar is trying to replace the heads of the justice departments that are investigating some of these cases and could investigate others? Coincidence? I don't think so.

I think he's just trying to stop all the free-wheeling political antics of leftist career prosecutors and get them focused back on their jobs.

Obama this, Obama that, Obama blah blah blah. All you guys do is try to drop distractions..

The point isn't to create a moral equivalency. The point is that campaign finance violations happen all the time, and they rarely involve jail time or getting a politician thrown out of office--which seems to me like your ultimate objective. So I don't think looking for a campaign finance violation is really going to amount to very much.

There are people in jail right now for cases that Trump has been mentioned as a co-conspirator and he escaped the same fate as his co-conspirators because he is the president.

If you're talking about Cohen, he plead guilty on a campaign violation that isn't even a crime. The point of that part of the prosecution was to create some media stories around it. If that was all they had on Cohen, he would have walked. However, he lied on his bank applications and hid money from the IRS. That's why he got jail time. Stormy Daniels' defamation suit was dismissed, and she was ordered to pay $290k in attorney's fees. Michael Avenatti is going to prison.

Just the fact that 3 whole "conservative" judges including 2 that he put on the bench basically slapped the fuck out of his arguments is enough to put him in the notice and certainly he is not happy about it.

The entire thing is a delay tactic so the Democrats don't get to use his tax returns for political purposes. If they contained criminal information, the IRS would have already referred them to the DoJ or state authorities. So far, we've seen nothing like this occur.

Everyone's been trying to take down the guy for 4 years.

A lot of the people who do have had their lives ruined or their reputations destroyed in the process.

Regardless, one would still be a fool for equating the stock market with the economy and thus use it as a proxy of the economies health and direction.

Stock markets are usually forward looking. So they see a brighter future than the news media. Generally, a lot of the economy is fine. A lot of the entertainment industry is hurting around live performances and movies theater releases, professional sports, restaurants, hotels and airlines. It has hurt minorities too. Democrats have a new n-word: non-essential.

[annatar1914]

@blackjack21 , as to Trump and Nationalism and Populism versus Conservatism;

Agreed. That's why I say supporting Trump isn't so much about who he is, but about who he is not.

After November, I feel like the need to have a conversation on the part of ''conservatives'' about their relation to ''Nationalist/Populists'' will be analogous to the one Liberals will need to have with their allies in the ''Faux Left''.

Yeah, I think who succeeds him in the Republican party will be interesting. Mike Pence is conservative, but establishmentarian and he has the personality of a wall flower. I also think that in the space of this "cultural revolution" that nobody asked for, Republicans who are not culture warriors seem rather weak. It's as if they only think about taxes, spending, military budget and that's about it--maybe abortion too. Yet, they don't seem to have any appetite for a cultural fight, and Trump is rather good at sparring with his opponents.

That's why Ted Cruz is probably looking on all this with great interest.

[Doug64]

@blackjack21 , as to Trump and Nationalism and Populism versus Conservatism;



After November, I feel like the need to have a conversation on the part of ''conservatives'' about their relation to ''Nationalist/Populists'' will be analogous to the one Liberals will need to have with their allies in the ''Faux Left''.

That's going to be the trick, and answer the question of whether the coalition can hold. So long as the tariffs and trade war is over reciprocal trade and not having vital supplies produced by our enemies, it'll work. If we get to the point of the populists pushing for protectionist tariffs against countries that don't have such of their own, there'll be a problem. Likewise with immigration. So long as the focus is on enforcing our immigration laws and so effectively stopping illegal migration, it'll work. Perhaps even restricting chain migration to spouses, minor children, and maybe parents. But beyond that, a push for heavy restriction of immigration could also cause a rift.

In both cases the Democrats could take advantage of the potential rift, they'd actually have an easier time of it since those voters that are the true populists have traditionally been Democrats and would probably be willing to revert if given the chance. But it would require the Democrats to abandon their socialism, identity politics, open borders stance, and take a more nationalistic (not to say patriotic) position. I don't think they can. At this point, if they try they lose their entire Left flank.

[blackjack21]

After November, I feel like the need to have a conversation on the part of ''conservatives'' about their relation to ''Nationalist/Populists'' will be analogous to the one Liberals will need to have with their allies in the ''Faux Left''.

Well, I think it's pretty simple: the establishment was willfully ignoring the voters. Not every faction is going to get what they want in terms of policy, but Trump hit on the intersection (I don't want to be mistaken for this notion of "intersectionality") of wages, trade and immigration that has had a massive impact on working class voters whether they are on the political right or political left.

Trump also fairly uniquely listened to black voters. Likewise, they won't get everything they want either, but they did get funding for historically black colleges, and they got prison sentencing reform. The thing is, you would have expected Obama to do that, but he really didn't do much for blacks as a function of listening to them. He could hand out Obamaphones, but that was really another welfare state giveaway to big businesses--making guys like Carlos Slim richer.

That's why Ted Cruz is probably looking on all this with great interest.

Yeah, I was for Cruz in 2016. He's a very sharp guy, and I'm guessing he has learned a lot watching Trump. It will be interesting to see what he does in 2024.

So long as the tariffs and trade war is over reciprocal trade and not having vital supplies produced by our enemies, it'll work.

I think that part of the coronavirus crisis exposed the dangers of overreliance on China. I think that is going to change much the same way the US quietly started pushing for energy independence in the wake of 9/11. China really screwed up with this one.

But beyond that, a push for heavy restriction of immigration could also cause a rift.

A huge part of the push against immigration is about wages, but the establishment has tried desperately to turn it into a racial argument.

In both cases the Democrats could take advantage of the potential rift, they'd actually have an easier time of it since those voters that are the true populists have traditionally been Democrats and would probably be willing to revert if given the chance.

Maybe. However, we're in the eye of the propaganda storm right now and will be for another four months. If my assumptions are correct, the Democrats are screwing themselves with the riots on the one hand, and the push to the left. Biden has come out for free healthcare for illegal immigrants. That's just not going to be popular with a huge segment of the US population.

But it would require the Democrats to abandon their socialism, identity politics, open borders stance, and take a more nationalistic (not to say patriotic) position.

Well, they aren't going to do that this year.

[Wulfschilde]

https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/a-pre ... 52467.html
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-c ... 2020-07-10

Finance websites and magazines all agree, a Biden Presidency would be disastrous for the stock market. Specifically, Biden wants to raise corporate taxes to 28%. This is in about the top 1/4th of world corporate tax rates. Marketwatch predicted a 20% drop in the stock market if he's elected President.

[Patrickov]

Specifically, Biden wants to raise corporate taxes to 28%. This is in about the top 1/4th of world corporate tax rates.

Two Three points.

1. Do they actually believe the Congress will let him do it?
2. Even if the entirely of the Government does, ordinary people who find the Financial sector detrimental to their lives probably are willing to take this damage, just like how many Hongkongers are willing to take economic damage just because they find that they need to stop China.
3. Wasn't one of the reasons that some people voted for Trump being that they wanted to punish Wall Street giants? What's wrong if Biden could do it better?

[XogGyux]

https://ca.finance.yahoo.com/news/a-president-joe-biden-would-be-brutal-for-the-stock-market-for-this-simplest-reason-161252467.html
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-c ... 2020-07-10

Finance websites and magazines all agree, a Biden Presidency would be disastrous for the stock market. Specifically, Biden wants to raise corporate taxes to 28%. This is in about the top 1/4th of world corporate tax rates. Marketwatch predicted a 20% drop in the stock market if he's elected President.

All the doomsayers.
Biden is a centrist. Similar to Bill Clinton and Obama... He was Obama's Vice president....
This is not a hot-head liberal ideologue. This is not medicare for all, UBI, reparations, wipe student debt bernie/warren kind of guy. All that you are doing is fear-mongering.
Then you have congress... Even if Biden wins... you have to deal with congress. Even if Democrats win the house, the Senate is less likely and even if they do, it would be by such a tiny razor margin that the politics to pass an aggressive tax reform would likely fizzle out quickly.
Again, this is nothing else than fearmongering.
It is so funny how people are so defensive of those corporate taxes... like those corporations are your defenseless babies.. When in reality they are blood-sucking succubus. Look at airlines for instance, they took tax cuts from trump a couple of years ago. Did they put that money towards funding employee's benefits? Maybe some pensions? What about increasing their salaries? Nope... they just bought their own stock to pump its value artificially. Then comes the recession, takes $$ from tax payers and keeps their employees just long enough to get the goverment's money requirement but they are already annoucing layoffs and asking people to voluntarily leave.
I am sick and tired of these people that keep pretending to be big capitalists and the moment companies fuck up, they take the money from our taxes to help the companies and then somehow we have to never mention the "raise taxes a little bit".
Fuck that... they want to leave the country? go ahead, we can create newer companies and outcompete the crap out of the old shit.
Reality is... they don't pay crap. They take loophole after loophole, deduction after deduction and by the end of the day companies pay a tiny fraction anyway.
So yeah, fear mongering. Nothing but fearmongering. The question is, do you realize what you are doing or are you an unwilling accomplice?

[Patrickov]

The question is, do you realize what you are doing or are you an unwilling accomplice?

Maybe he's a perpetrator himself?

[Hindsite]

All the doomsayers.
Biden is a centrist. Similar to Bill Clinton and Obama... He was Obama's Vice president....
This is not a hot-head liberal ideologue. This is not medicare for all, UBI, reparations, wipe student debt bernie/warren kind of guy. All that you are doing is fear-mongering.
Then you have congress... Even if Biden wins... you have to deal with congress. Even if Democrats win the house, the Senate is less likely and even if they do, it would be by such a tiny razor margin that the politics to pass an aggressive tax reform would likely fizzle out quickly.
Again, this is nothing else than fearmongering.
It is so funny how people are so defensive of those corporate taxes... like those corporations are your defenseless babies.. When in reality they are blood-sucking succubus. Look at airlines for instance, they took tax cuts from trump a couple of years ago. Did they put that money towards funding employee's benefits? Maybe some pensions? What about increasing their salaries? Nope... they just bought their own stock to pump its value artificially. Then comes the recession, takes $$ from tax payers and keeps their employees just long enough to get the goverment's money requirement but they are already annoucing layoffs and asking people to voluntarily leave.
I am sick and tired of these people that keep pretending to be big capitalists and the moment companies fuck up, they take the money from our taxes to help the companies and then somehow we have to never mention the "raise taxes a little bit".
Fuck that... they want to leave the country? go ahead, we can create newer companies and outcompete the crap out of the old shit.
Reality is... they don't pay crap. They take loophole after loophole, deduction after deduction and by the end of the day companies pay a tiny fraction anyway.
So yeah, fear mongering. Nothing but fearmongering. The question is, do you realize what you are doing or are you an unwilling accomplice?

What you don't seem to understand is that if the Democrats get in power, they will not be content to just raise the big cooperation taxes. I am just a regular average guy and after Bush lowered my taxes, Obama and Biden came along and increased my taxes along with many others just like me. So I was happy when Trump came alone and lowered my taxes along with the big cooperation's taxes. Businesses pay the salaries for most of Americans and if they receive tax breaks, it means that they can hire more people and can pay bigger salaries and our overall economy increases. Joe Biden and the Democrats will raise taxes because they are for bigger government control so that they can rule over the average working person and those that pay their salaries.

[Istanbuller]

What you don't seem to understand is that if the Democrats get in power, they will not be content to just raise the big cooperation taxes. I am just a regular average guy and after Bush lowered my taxes, Obama and Biden came along and increased my taxes along with many others just like me. So I was happy when Trump came alone and lowered my taxes along with the big cooperation's taxes. Businesses pay the salaries for most of Americans and if they receive tax breaks, it means that they can hire more people and can pay bigger salaries and our overall economy increases. Joe Biden and the Democrats will raise taxes because they are for bigger government control so that they can rule over the average working person and those that pay their salaries.

You are right. Joe Biden already lost control over his own campaign. He wants to make sure Americans that US is a spent force.

Nice reading here:

Even In Defeat, Bernie Sanders Is Pulling Joe Biden to the Left

An expansive new batch of policy proposals shows Biden moving toward a more expensive, more intrusive policy agenda.

https://reason.com/2020/07/09/even-in-d ... -the-left/

[Hindsite]

You are right. Joe Biden already lost control over his own campaign. He wants to make sure Americans that US is a spent force.

Nice reading here:

Creepy Joe Biden has been known for plagiarizing others because he seems to never have ideas of his own. After accepting Bernie Sander's ideas he then comes out plagiarizing parts of Trump's economic policy in a speech.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/20 ... rican-age/

[Wulfschilde]

Two Three points.

1. Do they actually believe the Congress will let him do it?
2. Even if the entirely of the Government does, ordinary people who find the Financial sector detrimental to their lives probably are willing to take this damage, just like how many Hongkongers are willing to take economic damage just because they find that they need to stop China.
3. Wasn't one of the reasons that some people voted for Trump being that they wanted to punish Wall Street giants? What's wrong if Biden could do it better?

1. Congress is held by Democrats, so if Biden were to win and increase that majority, maybe take Senate majority too, then presumably yes, they would. They have said that they're in favor of far more extreme things.

2. The issue with the Hong Kongers is complicated. The protests are predominantly young people whom are still in school and who may not appreciate the long-term financial damage they may have done to Hong Kong. Then, some of them will move out after the damage is done, leaving the older people, retail workers and so-on to suffer the consequences. Sorry but that's the truth.

3. Not exactly, no. Cutting taxes is a pretty common thing that Republicans want. You are confusing Wall Street with Washington insiders, they aren't exactly the same. Definitely some overlap but not exactly the same.

[Beren]

Yeah I'll believe when I see it. Everyone's been trying to take down the guy for 4 years.

I wonder if they actually have been or they just wanted to bleed him so much that he can't get reelected. Why would anyone have Pence instead of him and why would they want to erode the political system that much further while there's so little trust in it? It's the people's job to take him down anyway, isn't it?

I think using the stock market as an overall gauge has problems. It's just one tool that only measures certain things.

It's not telling you the health of the economy it's telling you the current value of publicly traded companies.

Stock market indices have no macroeconomic relevance whatsoever.

[Doug64]

Two Three points.

1. Do they actually believe the Congress will let him do it?

We don’t generally elect presidents on the grounds that it’s safe because Congress will protect us from them.

2. Even if the entirely of the Government does, ordinary people who find the Financial sector detrimental to their lives probably are willing to take this damage, just like how many Hongkongers are willing to take economic damage just because they find that they need to stop China.
3. Wasn't one of the reasons that some people voted for Trump being that they wanted to punish Wall Street giants? What's wrong if Biden could do it better?

Do you have any idea how many people are dependent on the stock market for their retirement savings? The government’s use of constant inflation as a hidden tax pretty much requires it.

[Patrickov]

The protests are predominantly young people ...

False.

The pro-democratic camp hosted a primaries for all pro-democrats last weekend. The more aggressive camp had a major victory. Data analysis showed that even older generations (those over 60) are disappointed of what China had done and endorsed more aggressive candidates.

My parents, who are in their 70's, are currently making comments very excitedly, harshly condemning "traditional" candidates. I, on the other hand, "played safe", and effectively picked the losing side.

[Doug64]

Well, they aren't going to do that this year.

Very true. If they lose again in November, it’ll be interesting to see if they can learn from the failure this time instead of doubling down on the position that they lost because Trump’s supporters (many of whom had no problem voting for Obama at least once) are racists.

[JohnRawls]

Trump is steadily declining in Texas. I wonder why is that happening?

Would be funny if my prediction will come true and Biden vs Trump will actually be like this. Prediction below was more of a troll and apocalyptic scenario of sorts but hey, we are getting closer and closer here: