Economic News Thread | Fed Quarter Point rate cut

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 659
  • Views: 14K
  • Politics 
superrific said:
Have you considered the possibility that the problem is that your explanations are not persuasive? And maybe that's because they do not account for what has actually happened over the past decade.

Here's the thing. You've said that you're committed to "material analysis." That's an a priori choice you've made, and an ideological one at that. It's not based on anything empirical. So then, you use that framework to analyze everything, without care for whether the framework has adequate explanatory power.

This isn't a comment about you, per se. It's about the left in general. It was the only acceptable viewpoint for much of the 20th century, and it still maintains currency today. But it's just ideology. People choose their frameworks and then interpret events within that framework, as if that's the only or best way to look at things.

There are times when material analysis is perspicacious. I just do not see any evidence that it explains events in our world. Look at what milom wrote about his experience in Ohio. And the election results confirm that (as did all the other Trump electoral results).
Click to expand...
I'm going to try one more time, then you can continue your racist screeds about Arabs and Latinos. Maybe if I format it in the same way you do, you'll get it.

1. I am not, and have never said, that Trump voters ONLY vote for him because of economic issues. There is a large portion of voters that vote for Republicans because of racial resentment. These people have been voting for Republicans for a long time at this point. It's also clear that these people DO NOT constitute an electoral majority. You're not making some grand point by continuing to shout this at me, and others, who already know this. In fact, it just comes across as incredibly smug.

2. If there's one thing I've learned about you in my time on the board, its that you have a very black and white view of things, and you're pretty reactionary yourself. You build assumptions about what people do and do not know based on very little. You never consider that I have my views because I've studied history or because I've done research or spent time working in politics. It must be because I don't know about the things you know about. That comes across as really condescending.

3. Let's look at this just through math. Let's say 33% of the population is R, 33% is D, and 33% is independent. The 33% of Rs and Ds will almost always vote for the R or D candidate. They aren't deciding the election. Let's say 20% of the independents are closet partisans who also vote R or D in every election. That leaves a group of 13% that are so-called persuadable voters.

Your theory is that Trump won these persuadable voters because of racial resentment. My theory is that there was a large enough number of persuadable voters who voted for Trump instead of Harris out of misguided concerns about inflation and cost of living. People can make their own decisions about who they think is more accurate, but I'm really tired of you building up a strawman against me in every single post that you direct towards me. For someone who goes on and on about how much others don't understand how politics works, it seems like you don't either. Your prognositcations about the election prove that alone.
 
Paine said:
I'm going to try one more time, then you can continue your racist screeds about Arabs and Latinos. Maybe if I format it in the same way you do, you'll get it.

1. I am not, and have never said, that Trump voters ONLY vote for him because of economic issues. There is a large portion of voters that vote for Republicans because of racial resentment. These people have been voting for Republicans for a long time at this point. It's also clear that these people DO NOT constitute an electoral majority. You're not making some grand point by continuing to shout this at me, and others, who already know this. In fact, it just comes across as incredibly smug.

2. If there's one thing I've learned about you in my time on the board, its that you have a very black and white view of things, and you're pretty reactionary yourself. You build assumptions about what people do and do not know based on very little. You never consider that I have my views because I've studied history or because I've done research or spent time working in politics. It must be because I don't know about the things you know about. That comes across as really condescending.

3. Let's look at this just through math. Let's say 33% of the population is R, 33% is D, and 33% is independent. The 33% of Rs and Ds will almost always vote for the R or D candidate. They aren't deciding the election. Let's say 20% of the independents are closet partisans who also vote R or D in every election. That leaves a group of 13% that are so-called persuadable voters.

Your theory is that Trump won these persuadable voters because of racial resentment. My theory is that there was a large enough number of persuadable voters who voted for Trump instead of Harris out of misguided concerns about inflation and cost of living. People can make their own decisions about who they think is more accurate, but I'm really tired of you building up a strawman against me in every single post that you direct towards me. For someone who goes on and on about how much others don't understand how politics works, it seems like you don't either. Your prognositcations about the election prove that alone.
Click to expand...
1. That's a fair point about how I've been posting about you. I'm not reacting only to you, but rather to the avalanche of hot takes about how Dems suck. But I have been aiming it at you too much. I didn't realize how much I have been until I looked, after you pointed it out.

2. I really do not have a black and white view of things in general. In fact, I was sort of famous on my law faculty for always doing nuance and careful consideration. If you look at my posts that aren't about MAGA, that's what you will see.

I am black and white about right-wing bullshit, for sure. I'm also pretty damn black and white about MAGA. So on those topics, you're observing accurately.

3. Nothing I said about Arabs or Latinos is racist. Throughout American history, immigrant groups have brought their culture here and acted accordingly. It's not exactly a surprise. And most of the time, that's great. But reading that letter that the Dearborn group wrote to Trump was the opposite of great. Really fucking depressing.

Anyway, I've been talking about the relationship between white culture and conservative politics for a long, long time. White culture has traditionally been the biggest threat and remains so today.

The reality is that only black voters overwhelmingly did the right thing this election, and even that was somewhat muted because of low turnout. But at least, by and large, they didn't vote for the wrong candidate.

4. I do think you've read history and done research. You're not a noob or a fool. It's just that a lot of people have also done that, and we've been through this trauma before. My read of you is that you've valued your own research and education above both the research and experience of some of us older hands. That's how it comes across to me, anyway. You made a fair point which I admitted in point 1. Maybe this is a fair point back?

5. It's not clear that these voters don't constitute an electoral majority. Here's the demographic story of white politics in America. Conservatives have more kids than liberals. Conservative kids go to high school and college and some of them, through education and associations with other people, become liberal.

But that latter process has been disrupted in recent years. I mean, conservatives figured it out a while back. So they've kept their kids away from any of those influences. Home school or private religious school, religious college like Hillsdale, and so on.

When we look at the youth vote going more R than ever, is that because of high housing prices? Or because the home schooling craze among the right-wing during the Obama years is now starting to have its effect on politics? This is my concern.

6. You're right that there must be some persuadable voters out there. But it kind of matters a lot who those voters are and how they see the world. The Trump era has been one of red-pilling -- not just in the sexism sense, but just MAGA in general. People have lost their fucking minds. I don't know if they are absorbing the hateful content, if it's just drawing out the animus that has always been there, or what.

And obviously economic performance is always going to be important in a political campaign. The issue for me is whether we should adjust our plans to chase a group of voters that we probably can't reach -- or at least can't reach on economic terms, given their willingness and even eagerness to blow up their own financial well-being in the name of culture wars. I mean, if there's one place in the country where Trump should have performed badly, one would think it would be Springfield OH. But he did better than ever.

My sense is that there are a lot of Bernie advocates who are using this as an opportunity to press their agendas from a decade ago. Everyone in politics does that. It's not a grievous mistake. But I remain entirely unconvinced that the Bernie playbook is up to the task in the actual timeline in which we live. And when people just assert that Bernie would have won in 2016 and 2024, it comes across as highly unserious.
 
superrific said:
1. That's a fair point about how I've been posting about you. I'm not reacting only to you, but rather to the avalanche of hot takes about how Dems suck. But I have been aiming it at you too much. I didn't realize how much I have been until I looked, after you pointed it out.

2. I really do not have a black and white view of things in general. In fact, I was sort of famous on my law faculty for always doing nuance and careful consideration. If you look at my posts that aren't about MAGA, that's what you will see.

I am black and white about right-wing bullshit, for sure. I'm also pretty damn black and white about MAGA. So on those topics, you're observing accurately.

3. Nothing I said about Arabs or Latinos is racist. Throughout American history, immigrant groups have brought their culture here and acted accordingly. It's not exactly a surprise. And most of the time, that's great. But reading that letter that the Dearborn group wrote to Trump was the opposite of great. Really fucking depressing.

Anyway, I've been talking about the relationship between white culture and conservative politics for a long, long time. White culture has traditionally been the biggest threat and remains so today.

The reality is that only black voters overwhelmingly did the right thing this election, and even that was somewhat muted because of low turnout. But at least, by and large, they didn't vote for the wrong candidate.

4. I do think you've read history and done research. You're not a noob or a fool. It's just that a lot of people have also done that, and we've been through this trauma before. My read of you is that you've valued your own research and education above both the research and experience of some of us older hands. That's how it comes across to me, anyway. You made a fair point which I admitted in point 1. Maybe this is a fair point back?

5. It's not clear that these voters don't constitute an electoral majority. Here's the demographic story of white politics in America. Conservatives have more kids than liberals. Conservative kids go to high school and college and some of them, through education and associations with other people, become liberal.

But that latter process has been disrupted in recent years. I mean, conservatives figured it out a while back. So they've kept their kids away from any of those influences. Home school or private religious school, religious college like Hillsdale, and so on.

When we look at the youth vote going more R than ever, is that because of high housing prices? Or because the home schooling craze among the right-wing during the Obama years is now starting to have its effect on politics? This is my concern.

6. You're right that there must be some persuadable voters out there. But it kind of matters a lot who those voters are and how they see the world. The Trump era has been one of red-pilling -- not just in the sexism sense, but just MAGA in general. People have lost their fucking minds. I don't know if they are absorbing the hateful content, if it's just drawing out the animus that has always been there, or what.

And obviously economic performance is always going to be important in a political campaign. The issue for me is whether we should adjust our plans to chase a group of voters that we probably can't reach -- or at least can't reach on economic terms, given their willingness and even eagerness to blow up their own financial well-being in the name of culture wars. I mean, if there's one place in the country where Trump should have performed badly, one would think it would be Springfield OH. But he did better than ever.

My sense is that there are a lot of Bernie advocates who are using this as an opportunity to press their agendas from a decade ago. Everyone in politics does that. It's not a grievous mistake. But I remain entirely unconvinced that the Bernie playbook is up to the task in the actual timeline in which we live. And when people just assert that Bernie would have won in 2016 and 2024, it comes across as highly unserious.
Click to expand...
Just like I remind you of every annoying shithead leftist you've had to deal with, you remind me of every smug, arrogant liberal I've had to deal with. Sometimes of our own actions, sometimes because we're mad at other things related to the subject and take it out on each other. I'd just like to be able to post again without you responding to every post I make trying to bring up this argument again, even on subjects that are ostensibly unrelated. No one is getting anything out of this, least of all you and I. The party is going to go whatever way it goes, and we won't have any say in it.

I'll concede that I do have a tendency to discount the arguments of people who are older than me. Usually because I've heard them before and they've been shown to be false by my experience of life and politics over the last 8 years. That's part of the reason I enjoy this board is because I get to hear y'all's perspective on things, which I rarely get to in my personal life (outside of older family members). I assume y'all also want to know what a young(er) person thinks about what happened in the election based on my own experiences and the experiences of other young people that I'm around and talk to. I'll continue to offer that perspective.
 
Paine said:
Just like I remind you of every annoying shithead leftist you've had to deal with, you remind me of every smug, arrogant liberal I've had to deal with. Sometimes of our own actions, sometimes because we're mad at other things related to the subject and take it out on each other. I'd just like to be able to post again without you responding to every post I make trying to bring up this argument again, even on subjects that are ostensibly unrelated. No one is getting anything out of this, least of all you and I. The party is going to go whatever way it goes, and we won't have any say in it.
Click to expand...
1. I have dealt with many shithead leftists far more annoying than you.
2. Your request about posting is entirely fair.
 


“…
The S&P 500 has soared 24% this year, buoyed by artificial-intelligence hype and optimism that lower inflation means less-restrictive monetary policy going forward. Lower interest rates typically encourage risk-taking and help boost stocks, and the Federal Reserve has slashed its benchmark rate twice since September.

But Fed officials are publicly questioning whether further cuts are needed right now as more data point to a strong economy. Derivative traders are currently pricing in several more rate cuts in 2025, and stocks could decline if those don’t come.

The prospect of tariffs has some of Wall Street’s biggest players on edge. Republican megadonor Ken Griffin, a hedge-fund titan and founder of Citadel, told students in the U.K. on Monday that he was “very anxious about the president’s willingness to engage in tariffs as a matter of trade policy,” Bloomberg reported.


Goldman Sachs is projecting a 10% gain for the S&P 500 next year, driven primarily by strong earnings growth. But higher-than-anticipated inflation, and in turn higher rates, is one of the biggest risks to that forecast, said David Kostin, chief equity strategist at Goldman.

“Why might we get higher inflation? It could be from immigration policy changes. It could be from tariffs. It could be from fiscal policy shifts. That’s one area we’re focusing a lot of attention on,” Kostin said. …”
 
nycfan said:


“…
The S&P 500 has soared 24% this year, buoyed by artificial-intelligence hype and optimism that lower inflation means less-restrictive monetary policy going forward. Lower interest rates typically encourage risk-taking and help boost stocks, and the Federal Reserve has slashed its benchmark rate twice since September.

But Fed officials are publicly questioning whether further cuts are needed right now as more data point to a strong economy. Derivative traders are currently pricing in several more rate cuts in 2025, and stocks could decline if those don’t come.

The prospect of tariffs has some of Wall Street’s biggest players on edge. Republican megadonor Ken Griffin, a hedge-fund titan and founder of Citadel, told students in the U.K. on Monday that he was “very anxious about the president’s willingness to engage in tariffs as a matter of trade policy,” Bloomberg reported.


Goldman Sachs is projecting a 10% gain for the S&P 500 next year, driven primarily by strong earnings growth. But higher-than-anticipated inflation, and in turn higher rates, is one of the biggest risks to that forecast, said David Kostin, chief equity strategist at Goldman.

“Why might we get higher inflation? It could be from immigration policy changes. It could be from tariffs. It could be from fiscal policy shifts. That’s one area we’re focusing a lot of attention on,” Kostin said. …”
Click to expand...

And how many Trump voters are here saying they voted for Trump to bring down inflation and interest rates?
 
Paine said:
Just like I remind you of every annoying shithead leftist you've had to deal with, you remind me of every smug, arrogant liberal I've had to deal with. Sometimes of our own actions, sometimes because we're mad at other things related to the subject and take it out on each other. I'd just like to be able to post again without you responding to every post I make trying to bring up this argument again, even on subjects that are ostensibly unrelated. No one is getting anything out of this, least of all you and I. The party is going to go whatever way it goes, and we won't have any say in it.

I'll concede that I do have a tendency to discount the arguments of people who are older than me. Usually because I've heard them before and they've been shown to be false by my experience of life and politics over the last 8 years. That's part of the reason I enjoy this board is because I get to hear y'all's perspective on things, which I rarely get to in my personal life (outside of older family members). I assume y'all also want to know what a young(er) person thinks about what happened in the election based on my own experiences and the experiences of other young people that I'm around and talk to. I'll continue to offer that perspective.
Click to expand...
Honest question. What is the difference between a shithead leftist and an arrogant liberal? I have arrogant liberal pretty well defined but not the shithead leftist.
 
Callatoroy said:
Honest question. What is the difference between a shithead leftist and an arrogant liberal? I have arrogant liberal pretty well defined but not the shithead leftist.
Click to expand...
Liberal ≠ leftist. The disdain that a lot of right-wingers feel for the cultural elitism of arrogant liberals is also felt by many leftists.

Say what you want about leftists, though I’m not sure how many you interact with at a personal level, but the most annoying ones tend to be more naive than arrogant in my experience at least.
 
nycfan said:


“…
The S&P 500 has soared 24% this year, buoyed by artificial-intelligence hype and optimism that lower inflation means less-restrictive monetary policy going forward. Lower interest rates typically encourage risk-taking and help boost stocks, and the Federal Reserve has slashed its benchmark rate twice since September.

But Fed officials are publicly questioning whether further cuts are needed right now as more data point to a strong economy. Derivative traders are currently pricing in several more rate cuts in 2025, and stocks could decline if those don’t come.

The prospect of tariffs has some of Wall Street’s biggest players on edge. Republican megadonor Ken Griffin, a hedge-fund titan and founder of Citadel, told students in the U.K. on Monday that he was “very anxious about the president’s willingness to engage in tariffs as a matter of trade policy,” Bloomberg reported.


Goldman Sachs is projecting a 10% gain for the S&P 500 next year, driven primarily by strong earnings growth. But higher-than-anticipated inflation, and in turn higher rates, is one of the biggest risks to that forecast, said David Kostin, chief equity strategist at Goldman.

“Why might we get higher inflation? It could be from immigration policy changes. It could be from tariffs. It could be from fiscal policy shifts. That’s one area we’re focusing a lot of attention on,” Kostin said. …”
Click to expand...


ChileG said:
And how many Trump voters are here saying they voted for Trump to bring down inflation and interest rates?
Click to expand...
I would advise Trump to wait a month after entering office and then brag about bringing the inflation rate down to 2.5% and the unemployment down to 4.1% after just one month in office !

He could also brag about the stock market being at an all time high after just one month in office !

MAGAs will sing the Doxology and demand that Trump be president for life 😏
 
Paine said:
Liberal ≠ leftist. The disdain that a lot of right-wingers feel for the cultural elitism of arrogant liberals is also felt by many leftists.

Say what you want about leftists, though I’m not sure how many you interact with at a personal level, but the most annoying ones tend to be more naive than arrogant in my experience at least.
Click to expand...
Eh I'd have to disagree there. I have found plenty of leftists to be plenty arrogant. Just like I have found plenty of liberals to be arrogant and plenty of conservatives to be arrogant. Arrogance and conviction of belief know no political bounds.
 
rodoheel said:
Eh I'd have to disagree there. I have found plenty of leftists to be plenty arrogant. Just like I have found plenty of liberals to be arrogant and plenty of conservatives to be arrogant. Arrogance and conviction of belief know no political bounds.
Click to expand...
Fair enough. Just my personal experience. Not to say I’ve never met an arrogant leftist lol. I see one every morning in the mirror.
 
Paine said:
Liberal ≠ leftist. The disdain that a lot of right-wingers feel for the cultural elitism of arrogant liberals is also felt by many leftists.

Say what you want about leftists, though I’m not sure how many you interact with at a personal level, but the most annoying ones tend to be more naive than arrogant in my experience at least.
Click to expand...
So a less worldly / educated liberal? Liberal lite? Is the transformation from leftist to liberal organic? I might like some leftists.
 
rodoheel said:
Eh I'd have to disagree there. I have found plenty of leftists to be plenty arrogant. Just like I have found plenty of liberals to be arrogant and plenty of conservatives to be arrogant. Arrogance and conviction of belief know no political bounds.
Click to expand...
Maybe, but the arrogance is born from different mental stimuli and experiences. I would say not all arrogances are equal.
 
Liberal = someone who promotes progressive ideals but realizes that to actualize those ideals means pursuing incremental change at a pace that the country is able to metabolize

Leftist ( shithead or otherwise) = someone who promotes progressive ideals but is naive and does not realize that our country cannot metabolize change at the speed of light
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top