Economic News

  • Thread starter Thread starter nycfan
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies: 2K
  • Views: 123K
  • Politics 
nycfan said:


Relever the private sector? In my world that means taking on more debt (leverage) but perhaps he means something more positive.
Click to expand...

Hahahahaha!!! I started reading that thinking he would say we were always going to have a transition from this incredible, unsustainable level of economic growth. Which would somewhat make sense. But he’s blaming the Trump Crash on . . . government spending??? What a fucking idiot.
 

Consumer Sentiment Nosedives on Gyrating Economic Policies​

University of Michigan’s index of consumer sentiment fell to 57.9 in mid-March from 64.7 last month​



“… The University of Michigan’s closely watched index of consumer sentiment nosedived an additional 11% to 57.9 in mid-March from 64.7 last month, much weaker than expectations of 63.2. It marks the lowest level since 2022 and a third fall in as many months.

Compared to this time last year, consumer sentiment is down 27%. A loss of confidence can be a headwind for economic growth, since consumers can delay or abandon planned purchases if they feel downbeat about their prospects.

Many consumers cited the high level of uncertainty around policy and other economic factors, said Joanne Hsu, director of the survey.

Inflation expectations for the year ahead jumped to 4.9% from 4.3% last month, the highest reading since late 2022, according to the survey. …”

——
Uncertainty and fear that tariffs will reignite inflation seem to be the key factors.

Kind of wild. Trump started his second term with some of his highest support ever and the benefit of Republicans and Independents swinging to a positive view of the economy more ore less because Biden was gone — a freebie. He could have actually built on that if he had any discipline at all, but he has blundered like a one-man herd of wild elephants into and on-again, off-again trade war with China and with our allies and a complete upending of 75+ years of foreign policy, while letting Musk and DOGE run wild in ways that generate reams of daily negative press for the Trump Administration (instead of a reasonably measured approach that could have been very targeted at making people feel like they are throwing off the yoke of annoying liberal “wokeness”).

It is a mind-blowing blown opportunity even knowing how erratic and egotistical Trump is. It seems he really believes he is right about everything and is hell-bound on proving it no matter the cost.
 
nycfan said:

Consumer Sentiment Nosedives on Gyrating Economic Policies​

University of Michigan’s index of consumer sentiment fell to 57.9 in mid-March from 64.7 last month​



“… The University of Michigan’s closely watched index of consumer sentiment nosedived an additional 11% to 57.9 in mid-March from 64.7 last month, much weaker than expectations of 63.2. It marks the lowest level since 2022 and a third fall in as many months.

Compared to this time last year, consumer sentiment is down 27%. A loss of confidence can be a headwind for economic growth, since consumers can delay or abandon planned purchases if they feel downbeat about their prospects.

Many consumers cited the high level of uncertainty around policy and other economic factors, said Joanne Hsu, director of the survey.

Inflation expectations for the year ahead jumped to 4.9% from 4.3% last month, the highest reading since late 2022, according to the survey. …”

——
Uncertainty and fear that tariffs will reignite inflation seem to be the key factors.

Kind of wild. Trump started his second term with some of his highest support ever and the benefit of Republicans and Independents swinging to a positive view of the economy more ore less because Biden was gone — a freebie. He could have actually built on that if he had any discipline at all, but he has blundered like a one-man herd of wild elephants into and on-again, off-again trade war with China and with our allies and a complete upending of 75+ years of foreign policy, while letting Musk and DOGE run wild in ways that generate reams of daily negative press for the Trump Administration (instead of a reasonably measured approach that could have been very targeted at making people feel like they are throwing off the yoke of annoying liberal “wokeness”).

It is a mind-blowing blown opportunity even knowing how erratic and egotistical Trump is. It seems he really believes he is right about everything and is hell-bound on proving it no matter the cost.
Click to expand...
He promised tariffs. The female candidate told them that would increase inflation. And they voted for the tariffs guy because they didn't like inflation.

Republicans are historically bad for the economy but the rural legend is that Republicans are better for the economy. That lie needs to die.
 
Paine said:
I saw that segment too. Hayes seemed to be in disbelief. Schumer contradicted his own strategy’s logic multiple times in the interview. That’s why the only real logic I can see behind this is Schumer trying to please the Democratic donor class by being the “adult in the room.” Stupid stupid stupid.
Click to expand...
I think it's more a disturbing reflection that Schumer sees NY as a state that could be in play for Pubs if he doesn't do dumb "centrist" stuff like this.

You and I are very much in agreement that Schumer and other centrist Dems' logic here is stupid and counterproductive. This is one of the first chances congressional Dems have had to actually stand in the way of what the Trump admin is doing and these ten just chose to do nothing. I don't have any inside information here but really do suspect that this is not the "donor class" pulling strings behind the scenes, but simply some centrist senators being cowards. The problem is that if Dems can't explain to voters what they're actually going to stand up for, voters will see no reason to choose them as an alternative to the Republican arsonists burning the government down.
 
Paine said:
Is it just centrists though? Retiring senators Durbin and Shaheen voted to invoke cloture. Brian Schatz? I mean really? Just weird. Schumer providing cover for Fetterman and Cortez-Masto makes some sense, but then you have Rosen voting against. It reeks of a lack of leadership at the very least. Warnock seems to think it’s time for Schumer to go.

If centrist House members felt it was in their best interest to vote against, I just don’t understand why centrist Senators wouldn’t feel the same if this was an ideological thing.
Click to expand...
I think it was a different calculus for the House folks than in the Senate because the Republicans could pass it without any Dem House votes. Different in the Senate when you would be casting the vote to shut the government down.

No disagreement on the lack of leadership. As we've discussed before I sometimes tend to think the Dems aren't as disorganized as they look on the surface; that some of the "disagreements" are more coordinated and calculated than they appear. But I do not think that's the case right now. The Dems are really struggling to get on the same page about the best way to respond to this all-out assault on the US government, and a result they're failing to present any sort of coherent messaging to the American people to explain what is happening and what they're doing to stop it. I'd very much like to see new Senate leadership for Dems, and maybe new House leadership as well. I'm candidly not convinced Schumer really has a coherent plan at this point.
 
Schumer isn't only protecting federal workers. Look, there's no playbook here. I wanted the Dems to use the filibuster, but there are risks in that:

1. The courts are currently our best option of resistance. Risking a judicial shutdown is self-defeating.
2. The GOP wants the government shut down. Very good chance they won't reopen it. Also, if we do shut it down, then the reopening bill would be subject to presidential veto. And we know Trump wants it shut down, because Trump has no intention of stopping. Shutting down the government would allow him to rampage with little resistance whatsoever.
3. What Trump and Musk are doing is exceedingly unpopular, and it's going to get more so. We don't need to blur the lines of accountability. My sense is that the lines won't be blurred: people will do what they always do, and blame the party in power. But we don't know if that's what will happen.
4. There are a lot of other people, besides government workers, who would suffer from an extended shutdown and again, there's no reason to think that it would reopen any time soon.

The debt ceiling is a better opportunity, because the GOP doesn't want to crash the financial system. Well, most of the GOP, at least.

I'm really of two minds here. I can see the arguments both ways.
 
Paine said:
Schumer’s buddies on Wall Street seem to be behind this utter disarmament by the Democrats. Is it any surprise that Schumer and Gillibrand seem to be the main ones pushing to vote for cloture?
Click to expand...
I am positive that Schumer's buddies on Wall Street are not behind this. Schumer's buddies on Wall Street definitely understand the long-term damage of MAGA. I would very much doubt there are any liberal folks on Wall Street who would are saying, "yeah, let's keep the government open so Trump can continue wrecking the economy." They are thinking about how to defeat Trump.

You've got to get over the reflexive habit to blame "Wall Street" for everything that happens.

There are no good answers here.
 
rodoheel said:
The problem is that if Dems can't explain to voters what they're actually going to stand up for, voters will see no reason to choose them as an alternative to the Republican arsonists burning the government down.
Click to expand...
But is this how politics really works? What alternative did the GOP present in '10? None. They just capitalized on anger. Midterms are about anger at the party in control.

And anyway, whatever the Dems say now would be forgotten before next year anyway.
 
Paine said:
What’s the argument for Trump wanting a shutdown? It seems to me that the idea of Trump or Musk wanting a shutdown was a GOP head fake. Otherwise, why did they whip the votes so hard for the CR in the House? Why did Vance come out and say the GOP would be blamed for a shutdown?

I understand it’s a tough spot for Senate Dems, but I really do think the GOP would’ve taken the blame for the shutdown and not gotten anything out of it more than what they’re already doing. We’ve effectively been in a rolling govt shutdown since Trump came into office. The critical mass of a real government shutdown could’ve given Dems more leverage IMO.
Click to expand...
Trump wants a shut down so he can declare an emergency and then arrogate all power to himself. That seems to have been a real concern of Whitehouse. It's not that Trump wants the government closed, per se. He just doesn't want to be bound by any laws. And the courts being out of session would be potentially catastrophic. It's the one locus of power that's actually able to resist.

I think you answered your own question: the GOP would be blamed for a shutdown had the House utterly failed. I think the GOP would be blamed for the whole thing, but do we know that?

Here's my read of the entire macro-political situation: Trump badly wants a Reichstag fire. He's itching so hard for something, anything that will give him an opportunity to declare a national emergency and then martial law. That's why he and his people are being especially provocative, even for them. I mean, he's declaring an "invasion" from migrants because he has no patience.

There's also a risk that the Pubs in the Senate will just get rid of the filibuster if they really wanted to pass the bill. While I support getting rid of it, obviously now is the very worst time for that to happen. I'm kind of shocked it hasn't happened yet.

Also, there's the not-insignificant matter of DC. Apparently Schumer has gotten an agreement for a vote on whether to restore DC's funding, and I assume that will pass easily. If Dems don't look out for DC, who will?
 
Paine said:
I’m just thinking in terms of the stock market. It would tank even more with a shutdown.
Click to expand...
The people on Wall Street that might be advising Schumer don't really give a fuck about what the stock market does over the next two weeks or whatever. They have longer term horizons. And they realize the existential threat Trump poses to financial markets everywhere, and the global economy.

Whatever the market would do in a shutdown would pale in comparison to what the market would do if Trump assumes dictatorial powers.
 
Paine said:
Complex situation for sure. I hope this is the right choice. Might end Schumer’s career.
Click to expand...
He's 74. He might be wrapping up his career anyway. I think the Dems are trying to get the old guard out -- hence Tina Smith and Maggie Hassan.

I think Schumer has been so visible on this because he wants to be the heat sink. Let the liberals train their fire on him, as he's headed out the door, and not take aim at Cortez-Mastro, Fetterman, Rosen, etc.
 


A guy with over half a billion dollars probably doesn’t need to settle for cheap bobbles, it is true. And claiming to focus on overall affordability rings hollow in the tariff whatever Trump feels like today environment.
 
nycfan said:


A guy with over half a billion dollars probably doesn’t need to settle for cheap bobbles, it is true. And claiming to focus on overall affordability rings hollow in the tariff whatever Trump feels like today environment.
Click to expand...

I wonder how the rich taste? Keep up what they're doing, and they may find out.
 
UNCMSinLS said:
I wonder how the rich taste? Keep up what they're doing, and they may find out.
Click to expand...
Yeah, we're living through a very tired and historically unremarkable pluto/kleptocratic revolution. The question remains, how bad does it get, for how many people? How uneven are the economic levers? How uneven are the means of violence? How uneven are the rhetorical talents? How uneven is the will?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top