Worst President's First 100 Days in History

#126
#126
midnight orange said:
The Broken Windows Fallacy


"Have you ever witnessed the anger of the good shopkeeper, James B., when his careless son happened to break a square of glass? If you have been present at such a scene, you will most assuredly bear witness to the fact, that every one of the spectators, were there even thirty of them, by common consent apparently, offered the unfortunate owner this invariable consolation — "It is an ill wind that blows nobody good. Everybody must live, and what would become of the glaziers if panes of glass were never broken?"
Now, this form of condolence contains an entire theory, which it will be well to show up in this simple case, seeing that it is precisely the same as that which, unhappily, regulates the greater part of our economical institutions.
Suppose it cost six francs to repair the damage, and you say that the accident brings six francs to the glazier's trade — that it encourages that trade to the amount of six francs — I grant it; I have not a word to say against it; you reason justly. The glazier comes, performs his task, receives his six francs, rubs his hands, and, in his heart, blesses the careless child. All this is that which is seen.
But if, on the other hand, you come to the conclusion, as is too often the case, that it is a good thing to break windows, that it causes money to circulate, and that the encouragement of industry in general will be the result of it, you will oblige me to call out, "Stop there! your theory is confined to that which is seen; it takes no account of that which is not seen."
It is not seen that as our shopkeeper has spent six francs upon one thing, he cannot spend them upon another. It is not seen that if he had not had a window to replace, he would, perhaps, have replaced his old shoes, or added another book to his library. In short, he would have employed his six francs in some way, which this accident has prevented.
Let us take a view of industry in general, as affected by this circumstance. The window being broken, the glazier's trade is encouraged to the amount of six francs; this is that which is seen. If the window had not been broken, the shoemaker's trade (or some other) would have been encouraged to the amount of six francs; this is that which is not seen.
And if that which is not seen is taken into consideration, because it is a negative fact, as well as that which is seen, because it is a positive fact, it will be understood that neither industry in general, nor the sum total of national labour, is affected, whether windows are broken or not.
Now let us consider James B. himself. In the former supposition, that of the window being broken, he spends six francs, and has neither more nor less than he had before, the enjoyment of a window.
In the second, where we suppose the window not to have been broken, he would have spent six francs on shoes, and would have had at the same time the enjoyment of a pair of shoes and of a window.
Now, as James B. forms a part of society, we must come to the conclusion, that, taking it altogether, and making an estimate of its enjoyments and its labours, it has lost the value of the broken window.
When we arrive at this unexpected conclusion: "Society loses the value of things which are uselessly destroyed;" and we must assent to a maxim which will make the hair of protectionists stand on end — To break, to spoil, to waste, is not to encourage national labour; or, more briefly, "destruction is not profit."
What will you say, Monsieur Industriel -- what will you say, disciples of good M. F. Chamans, who has calculated with so much precision how much trade would gain by the burning of Paris, from the number of houses it would be necessary to rebuild?
I am sorry to disturb these ingenious calculations, as far as their spirit has been introduced into our legislation; but I beg him to begin them again, by taking into the account that which is not seen, and placing it alongside of that which is seen. The reader must take care to remember that there are not two persons only, but three concerned in the little scene which I have submitted to his attention. One of them, James B., represents the consumer, reduced, by an act of destruction, to one enjoyment instead of two. Another under the title of the glazier, shows us the producer, whose trade is encouraged by the accident. The third is the shoemaker (or some other tradesman), whose labour suffers proportionably by the same cause. It is this third person who is always kept in the shade, and who, personating that which is not seen, is a necessary element of the problem. It is he who shows us how absurd it is to think we see a profit in an act of destruction. It is he who will soon teach us that it is not less absurd to see a profit in a restriction, which is, after all, nothing else than a partial destruction. Therefore, if you will only go to the root of all the arguments which are adduced in its favour, all you will find will be the paraphrase of this vulgar saying — What would become of the glaziers, if nobody ever broke windows?"
Click to expand...

Same thing with shop lifting. I'm not saying we should break windows. I'm saying communities do better with factories and manufacturing than without.
 
#128
#128
Burger said:
Same thing with shop lifting. I'm not saying we should break windows. I'm saying communities do better with factories and manufacturing than without.
Click to expand...

I would argue that communities do best when they can purchase products that come from factories and manufacturing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#130
#130
midnight orange said:
All burger flippers are not going to go into air conditioner manufacturing and the burger flipper is really hurt when it costs him/her $500 more to replace an air conditioner.
Click to expand...

99% chance a burger flipper doesn't own where they live, thus they rent, so they won't be paying for any major repairs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#133
#133
Burger said:
Wilbur Ross made his millions by being able to weave through different economic policies in many different industries.
Click to expand...

Making profits and growing the economy are totally unrelated. What's good for the companies he grew is not necessarily good for the economy. Chances are, in some/many cases he got wealthy by being smart/opportunistic enough to take advantage of bad regulatory law. So it stands to reason that his personal experience bias could lead him to valuing the wrong kinds of policies.

What we have now is not free trade at all. We pay for the privilege to trade in China, while they pay nothing to trade here. It's a unilateral free trade agreement. There is no true free trade.

Our current debt situation is because we follow the Keysian philosophy of economics of spending aimlessly to make money.
Click to expand...

Debt and Keynes have nothing to do with the discussion, tho I am with you there.

If we don't have "free trade at all" then what exactly do we need protectionism from? Your point kind of collapses on itself.

We are not losing in our trade with China. We are both winning. Cheap goods are great for economic growth. It's one of the best ways to grow an economy. Conversely, inflating prices is one of the best ways to stifle an economy.

There are two different aspects to foreign trade. You are obsessed with consumer goods. There are also capital accounts that balance out trade.

We run a trade deficit on goods because we are rich. Want to run a balance on goods? Make us not rich. The Chinese don't have money to blow on American goods. That's why there is such an imbalance on goods. But there is also an imbalance on capital accounts. The Chinese are furiously investing in our economy. You see those dollar bills we give them are just paper and only have value if they find their way back to our economy, eventually. So the Chinese have invested zillions in our economy, developing real estate and funding business ventures. They are creating jobs here. It's just not manufacturing jobs.

You wanna go back to the great depression? We were running trade surpluses on goods during the depression. :good!:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#134
#134
Carl Pickens said:
So the US should rely on cheap substandard manufacturing performed by sweatshop labor? Should we all shop at Walmart for everything too? We can't manufacture anything because it isn't cheap?... you sound like a b****
Click to expand...

You okay, CP?

Don't get your heart rate worked up. You may pop a boner, stroke out, or both.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#135
#135
OuterBanksVol said:
WASHINGTON — President Trump’s failure to make good on his signature promise to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act is the most crushing political defeat of his early days in the White House.

But it is hardly the only one.

Mr. Trump — who sold himself as a winner who could turn around a country that “doesn’t win anymore” — has endured a litany of missteps, controversies, resignations and investigations, all of which have dented his “I alone can fix it” vow to remake government with businesslike efficiency.

A month shy of the 100-day mark that presidents use to gauge success, Mr. Trump’s largely self-inflicted setbacks are evidence of a novice politician, often uninterested in the inner workings of government, who is struggling to wield his constitutional authority or fully understand the limits of his office.

“No administration has ever been off to a worse 100-day start,” said Steve Schmidt, a longtime Republican strategist who served as a counselor to Vice President Dick Cheney.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/25/...column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news


Hey, Donald! Make America Great Again... RESIGN!!!!

View attachment 129541

^^^ Agreed, Donald. Agreed.
Click to expand...

I guess you are still not over losing the election. Stop the hate and anger. Try and have a nice day.
 
#136
#136
volprof said:
without question, the worst start to a presidency in memory.

The disasters will only keep piling up, as the approval ratings will only keep going down.

The head-in-the-sanders on here are only placated at the moment by their 401ks. Once that goes, as it inevitably will - because, you know, history - they will crash and burn with the bum as well.

All befitting a fake presidency that never should have been.
Click to expand...

lol!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#137
#137
Don't want to start a new thread, but I lol'ed at the article.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/03/27/trump-handed-merkel-374b-nato-bill-during-talks.html

President Trump handed a bill to German Chancellor Angela Merkel for about $400 billion -- money he claims Germany owes NATO -- during their White House meeting earlier this month, according to a British newspaper.

Trump has been outspoken about NATO countries not meeting their pledge to spend at last 2 percent of GDP on defense. He raised the issue publicly in the joint press conference he held with Merkel on March 17.

But The Times of London reported Sunday that Trump had gone a step further and told officials to calculate how much German defense spending had fallen short of the target since 2002 -- when former Chancellor Gerhard Schröder committed to higher defense spending. The bill was then handed to Merkel during their private meeting, The Times reported, to the tune of more than 300 billion U.K. pounds – about $374 billion.
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#139
#139
FLVOL_79 said:
Just more Trump-phobia, misplaced childlike hissy fit rage, and desperate fear mongering.

Technically by Trump not replacing Obama care he has secured a victory for all Americans..according to HRC..
Click to expand...

You're kidding, right? No one, and I mean no one, could say something like this with a straight face. Obama's presidency was filled with nothing but fear mongering false narratives from ignorant, far right conservatives. Guys like you lived on it, without the first dam clue
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#140
#140
Burger said:
With shrinking departments, I mean staff cuts.
Bringing back manufacturing because of less regulations and lower cost is a good thing. Bringing it back because of increased barriers is a bad thing. We have to use tariffs as a threat so we don't get taken advantage of anymore. For us to trade our product into China, we pay tariffs and duties.
Click to expand...

Manufacturing went abroad because of low wages. Very little movement from out of the states was due to over regulation. The US auto industry has had positive job growth for years now. Trying to grow the economy too fast is a mistake. In the shape we were in after 2008, slow, steady growth was the only manner in which we could achieve real stability within the economy. Supply side didn't work in the 80s and won't work now
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#141
#141
Even lefty constituencies want to talk about progress and getting things done, yet all their reps want to take about is Russia.

At Pelosi town hall
@lhfang
Despite a lot of voter interest in big reforms like single payer, Pelosi and Jackie Speier kept guiding the conversation back to Russia
Click to expand...
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#143
#143
Consumer confidence numbers just released.

Expected 114, actual 126

Conference Board: "Consumer confidence increased sharply in March to its highest level since December 2000"

Consumers have an unusually high level of confidence in a Russian pawn
 
#144
#144
golfballs said:
Consumer confidence numbers just released.

Expected 114, actual 126

Conference Board: "Consumer confidence increased sharply in March to its highest level since December 2000"

Consumers have an unusually high level of confidence in a Russian pawn
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how you could, with a straight face, tie consumer confidence with Trump. Perhaps in spite of him?

The Dow is on an 11 day slide and Trumps approval ratings are at a low that would make Nixon blush.

If you thought you could pee on legs and convince rational people it was raining then you're in the wrong place.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#145
#145
Septic said:
I'm not sure how you could, with a straight face, tie consumer confidence with Trump. Perhaps in spite of him?

The Dow is on an 11 day slide and Trumps approval ratings are at a low that would make Nixon blush.

If you thought you could pee on legs and convince rational people it was raining then you're in the wrong place.
Click to expand...

I have a hard time keeping a straight face reading your shill posts.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2017/03/28/consumer-confidence-leaps-new-16-year-high/99706132/

Consumer confidence surged to a new 16-year high in March, fueled by strong job and wage growth, lofty stock prices and cheap gasoline.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the president and the new administration policies don't have any effect on how people view the economy. Just a coincidence, or perhaps if we didn't have a russian operative in the White House they'd be even higher? :crazy:

Of course you still believe polls coming from outfits whose numbers suggested Hillary would have a 98% change of winning the election. I know they fit your agenda, but perhaps, they're wrong?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#146
#146
114VOL said:
You're kidding, right? No one, and I mean no one, could say something like this with a straight face. Obama's presidency was filled with nothing but fear mongering false narratives from ignorant, far right conservatives. Guys like you lived on it, without the first dam clue
Click to expand...

You people are literally no different, if not worse. Remember the DeVos nomination? Libtards said kids would commit suicide because of that nomination. So dumb.

And soon we are going to hear how Trump EO's are causing tornadoes, hurricanes, hood crime rates, etc. And then there are the never ending protests..

edit

And here is just a sampling the absolute insanity that drives the left:
http://pagesix.com/2017/03/27/schumer-loses-cool-with-trump-supporter-at-swanky-restaurant/

Like a mini campaign of terror. This isn't the first time libtards have gone into a restaurant and gone bonkers over losing an election..
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#147
#147
FLVOL_79 said:
You people are literally no different, if not worse. Remember the DeVos nomination? Libtards said kids would commit suicide because of that nomination. So dumb.

And soon we are going to hear how Trump EO's are causing tornadoes, hurricanes, hood crime rates, etc. And then there are the never ending protests..

edit

And here is just a sampling the absolute insanity that drives the left:
http://pagesix.com/2017/03/27/schumer-loses-cool-with-trump-supporter-at-swanky-restaurant/

Like a mini campaign of terror. This isn't the first time libtards have gone into a restaurant and gone bonkers over losing an election..
Click to expand...

You people??? You're one of those conservatives that believes everyone that disagrees with you espouses the opposite extreme opinion and all believe the same things. You must believe it in order to post something so remarkably stupid. I haven't done any of the things you are describing. I stated a truth. It's apparent you're all about sides. My side is America. I have as much disdain for Pelosi and Reid as I do people like Cruz and SEssions. I have no use for the fringes or those like you who take the actions of the fringes and try to apply them to everyone that doesn't share your far right, narrow minded ideology.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#149
#149
golfballs said:
I have a hard time keeping a straight face reading your shill posts.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2017/03/28/consumer-confidence-leaps-new-16-year-high/99706132/



Yeah, the president and the new administration policies don't have any effect on how people view the economy. Just a coincidence, or perhaps if we didn't have a russian operative in the White House they'd be even higher? :crazy:

Of course you still believe polls coming from outfits whose numbers suggested Hillary would have a 98% change of winning the election. I know they fit your agenda, but perhaps, they're wrong?
Click to expand...

Lulz. "shill posts"

Are you aware that the CCI is a lagging indicator? The honeymoon is over and you're not bright enough to realize it.

36%. THIRTY SIX.

That's the number you need to be concerned with. That number isnt lagging. You keep whistling past the grave yard though.
 
#150
#150
114VOL said:
Manufacturing went abroad because of low wages. Very little movement from out of the states was due to over regulation. The US auto industry has had positive job growth for years now. Trying to grow the economy too fast is a mistake. In the shape we were in after 2008, slow, steady growth was the only manner in which we could achieve real stability within the economy. Supply side didn't work in the 80s and won't work now
Click to expand...

I'd like to see some data to support the bolded - absurd to suggest that the ever growing regulatory regime was not an important factor in manufacturing loss.

The part about growing "too fast" is an absolute hoot. No economist would consider 3% too fast yet we never got there in the last 8 years.

The economy could easily sustain 4% without impacting stability.

Recessions aren't the result of above 3% growth, they are typically the result of bubbles that the government refuses to slowly deflate because it's politically unpopular.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top