Breaking News: Spontaneous meeting at White House

[elysiantraveller]

Originally Posted by tucker6

Wait a sec. You claim that a $1M sum in 1976 would be worth more than $3.3B today if invested in the stock market. And I'm the moron?

Wait a sec? You buy he inherited $1 million?

Did he not file BK on his casino properties?

Google is your friend...

Oh wait!?!?

Were deflecting again from the actual topic.

Seriously dude you're embarrassing yourself.

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by PaceAdvantage

Anyone who claims Trump is an economic imbecile is buying into the myth.

From your many posts on here, you have telegraphed to me (if not wrote it outright) that you believe he is an economic imbecile.

Clocker just came right out and wrote it above.

Trump is a successful business man, primarily in the area of NY real estate. You don't have to understand the economics of trade to buy and sell real estate. It is neither imported nor exported.

It is a common fallacy to assume that someone that stands out in one field is knowledgeable about another. In reality, what works in one field often fails in another.

Trump's field of expertise is real estate, mine is economics. I would be hard put to name 5 posters here that understand economics and trade. All of them are highly critical of Trump's policies for legitimate objective reasons, but are attacked as Trump haters. ET is one of them currently taking the most flack.

I have posted a number of very good resources for basic information and education about trade economics here, and have seen zero evidence that anyone not already familiar with the subject have even looked at them. My positions have been routinely attacked without a shred of fact, rational argument or evidence, but always just dismissed as a Trump hater. Businessmen and economists that criticize Trump's policies are not Trump haters, they actually know more than he does on the subject. Trump's views on trade economics are incredibly naive, and harmful to the country.

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by Clocker

Trump is a successful business man, primarily in the area of NY real estate. You don't have to understand the economics of trade to buy and sell real estate. It is neither imported nor exported.

It is a common fallacy to assume that someone that stands out in one field is knowledgeable about another. In reality, what works in one field often fails in another.

Trump's field of expertise is real estate, mine is economics. I would be hard put to name 5 posters here that understand economics and trade. All of them are highly critical of Trump's policies for legitimate objective reasons, but are attacked as Trump haters. ET is one of them currently taking the most flack.

I have posted a number of very good resources for basic information and education about trade economics here, and have seen zero evidence that anyone not already familiar with the subject have even looked at them. My positions have been routinely attacked without a shred of fact, rational argument or evidence, but always just dismissed as a Trump hater. Businessmen and economists that criticize Trump's policies are not Trump haters, they actually know more than he does on the subject. Trump's views on trade economics are incredibly naive, and harmful to the country.

Alright, I'd like your opinion on a possible currency reset based on gold or some sort of bimetallism....

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by tucker6

Says the internet warrior about a billionaire businessman with an economics degree from Wharton. Do you know how stupid your comment sounds on the face of it?

Only to people who don't understand economics. Trump went to Wharton in the late '60's. The major macroeconomic theories all major universities were teaching at the time have since been shown to be wrong and not realistic.

In economics anyway, Trump is still living in the '60's. Some of us have moved on.

And to repeat myself, success in one field of business (two if you count star of third-rate reality TV) does not necessarily carry over in much different fields such as foreign trade or the public sector. The economics of running a government are much different than that of running a business in the private sector.

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by ReplayRandall

Alright, I'd like your opinion on a possible currency reset based on gold or some sort of bimetallism....

My opinion is that it will never happen. Governments have gotten too accustomed to manipulating their currencies to their advantage, and would never give up that power.

Other than the use of money as a policy tool, that is not an area I claim any knowledge of.

[tucker6]

Originally Posted by Clocker

Only to people who don't understand economics. Trump went to Wharton in the late '60's. The major macroeconomic theories all major universities were teaching at the time have since been shown to be wrong and not realistic.

In economics anyway, Trump is still living in the '60's. Some of us have moved on.

And to repeat myself, success in one field of business (two if you count star of third-rate reality TV) does not necessarily carry over in much different fields such as foreign trade or the public sector. The economics of running a government are much different than that of running a business in the private sector.

If you had been an economics major, as Trump was, you would have been instructed on micro and macro economics, trade of all types, and all forms of economics. You name it, they teach it. I know, I've done it.

So please do continue to be a uneducated blow hard on the subject. I've been there, done that myself to a 1/1000th of the amount Trump has, and I know a fake when I see one. Both you and Elysian are fakes on this subject. But please go on about your wisdom in the face of Trumpism on Pace Advantage. I chuckle every time.

I suggest you two read more of what Classhandicapper is dishing out. He's spot on, and seems to have more patience than me in explaining the subject matter. Have a great day.

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by tucker6

If you had been an economics major, as Trump was, you would have been instructed on micro and macro economics, trade of all types, and all forms of economics. You name it, they teach it. I know, I've done it.

A quantum leap to a wrong conclusion. Economics major? Hint: they don't even let you into grad school, let alone give you a degree, if you weren't an economics major. I know, I've done it.

The rest of your post is the usual person attack devoid of facts.

I have explained in detail how Trump is totally wrong in his opinions about trade deficits and tariffs. His opinions are based on instinct and emotion, without regard to the way the real world works. "Deficits" are bad in the private sector, so he thinks anything called "deficits" are bad in the public sector. They are not the same thing. You refuse to address those facts and continue dismissing any objective criticism of Trump's policies as hatred.

Both you and Elysian are fakes on this subject.

Again, you have made no effort to objectively prove such a claim, but write it off to hate. But you have no more grasp of the subject than does Trump, or at least have failed to show it.

[elysiantraveller]

Originally Posted by tucker6

If you had been an economics major, as Trump was, you would have been instructed on micro and macro economics, trade of all types, and all forms of economics. You name it, they teach it. I know, I've done it.

So please do continue to be a uneducated blow hard on the subject. I've been there, done that myself to a 1/1000th of the amount Trump has, and I know a fake when I see one. Both you and Elysian are fakes on this subject. But please go on about your wisdom in the face of Trumpism on Pace Advantage. I chuckle every time.

I suggest you two read more of what Classhandicapper is dishing out. He's spot on, and seems to have more patience than me in explaining the subject matter. Have a great day.

CH is famous for his we're taking it up rear comments and general disdain for free trade agreements and deficits.

Deficits have been covered countless times.

And Trump, if his words are to be trusted... you never know, just proposed a completely free unrestricted deal with Europe.

Why are you guys happy with that?

The correct answer is because you're sheep that parrot the line of Donald.

Pro tip: if I'm happy with the outcome of a Donald Trump meeting odds are you shouldn't be right?

Still waiting on TPP.

[incoming]

WOW!!! Where am I....in an institution of higher learning or the back room of a horse gambling site.

[Greyfox]

Originally Posted by Clocker

"Deficits" are bad in the private sector, so he thinks anything called "deficits" are bad in the public sector. They are not the same thing.

I am not an economics major, but I have ran successful private businesses.
Can you tell us why 'deficits' are acceptable in the public sector?
In my ignorance, it seems to me that deficits add up and become long term debts. Some future generation has to pay them back someday. No?

[Ocala Mike]

Is the ghost of John Maynard Keynes haunting this group? Deficit spending, i.e., "priming the pump," has largely fallen out of favor and is only to be called upon in dire emergencies (see 2008). Oh, also when it's necessary to invoke huge tax windfalls and soybean farmer welfare programs.

[Clocker]

Originally Posted by Greyfox

I am not an economics major, but I have ran successful private businesses.
Can you tell us why 'deficits' are acceptable in the public sector?
In my ignorance, it seems to me that deficits add up and become long term debts. Some future generation has to pay them back someday. No?

Oops, you caught me. I got sloppy there. I meant trade deficits, not budget deficits.

Trade deficit means that American consumers are buying more imports than American producers are exporting. That means that more US dollars are going out of the country for foreign goods than are coming back in for US goods. Trump and fans assume that is evil, and is destroying our manufacturing industry and eventually our economy.

The other side of the trade coin is capital. If we have a trade deficit, we always have a capital surplus. That means that more investment is coming into the country than is going out. Those dollars US consumers spend on Chinese goods come back as investments in US stocks, bonds and companies. Best case, they create American jobs. Worst case, they finance the US federal deficit.

[davew]

I thought this meeting was going to be important, like his resignation or something. Just a meeting with the unelected leader of Europe about free trade or something. The prez wouldn't even answer some unrelated questions from CNN wannabe.

[ReplayRandall]

Originally Posted by Clocker

Oops, you caught me. I got sloppy there. I meant trade deficits, not budget deficits.

Trade deficit means that American consumers are buying more imports than American producers are exporting. That means that more US dollars are going out of the country for foreign goods than are coming back in for US goods. Trump and fans assume that is evil, and is destroying our manufacturing industry and eventually our economy.

The other side of the trade coin is capital. If we have a trade deficit, we always have a capital surplus. That means that more investment is coming into the country than is going out. Those dollars US consumers spend on Chinese goods come back as investments in US stocks, bonds and companies. Best case, they create American jobs. Worst case, they finance the US federal deficit.

That used to be the case, but because of the gold-backed Petro-yuan launch, it poses a direct threat to the dollar being the world's reserve currency....Thus the game has changed, so have the economic trade and capital dynamics.


Trump's economic advisors aren't from the 60's, nor are they Keynesian.

[hcap]

‘It had to be very simple’: Europeans used ‘colorful cue cards’ to explain trade to Trump
https://www.rawstory.com/2018/07/sim...n-trade-trump/

European Union officials who flew to Washington, D.C. this week to try to negotiate a trade treaty with President Donald Trump knew that they couldn’t present him with large sets of complicated information, according to a new report from the Wall Street Journal.

Specifically, the Journal’s sources say that EU representatives made use of “colorful cue cards” that they thought would help keep the president’s attention during meetings. Each card contained what WSJ describes as “simplified explainers” that “had at most three figures about a specific topic, such as trade in cars or standards for medical devices.”

One European official speaking anonymously to WSJ reporters says that they knew they’d have to dumb things down compared to typical meetings they had with world leaders given the president’s penchant for getting distracted during meetings and presentations.

“We knew this wasn’t an academic seminar,” the official says. “It had to be very simple.”

Last year, a White House confidant told the Washington Post that Trump only had enough patience to get through a “half page” of information during a meeting, and would often tune out of meetings if they lasted longer than just two minutes.

“Even a single page of bullet points on the country seemed to tax the president’s attention span on the subject, said senior White House officials,” the Post reported.