He's not a Trumper! He has a wide body of work here and has always provided thoughtful and well reasoned content. He also happens to be one of the few people here who has actual professional finance experience. I'm on your side, believe me, and for that reason especially I'm saying its important for us to be thoughtful and reasonable in turn.I'm simply replying to the Trumper.
And you know this how?
Did you read what I posted previously (?) 15 out 25 businesses in Trump/Kushner properties filed in the loan docs that they had 1 employee or 0 or none reported. Does that sound like befitting a over $150,000 loan request. Well actually considering the property owners I guess it does.
I'm simply replying to the Trumper.
Ha ha ha. Nice!Time to put in robots. It's the future anyway. Robots do all the work, humans collect all the money via universal basic income. Eventually we will all be unemployed. they are just ahead of the times.
Both of these statements can be true. But one has to be careful not to jump to the conclusion that "more businesses are moving in" and "vibrant" economy" because "tax cuts [were introduced]." One has to consider another factor which often dominates, and that is Government Spending. When government spending increases it raises both tax revenues and the vibrancy of the economy and may or may not increase inflation, which also increases nominal revenue. It is a very difficult problem in economics to sort out the net effects of these interdependent factors.No, look at the government's revenue after Trump introduced the tax cuts. Revenue increased because more businesses are moving in and vibrant economy.
And quite inconveniently the deficit skyrocketed entirely because of the Trump tax cuts.Both of these statements can be true. But one has to be careful not to jump to the conclusion that "more businesses are moving in" and "vibrant" economy" because "tax cuts [were introduced]." One has to consider another factor which often dominates, and that is Government Spending. When government spending increases it raises both tax revenues and the vibrancy of the economy and may or may not increase inflation. It is a very difficult problem in economics to sort out the net effects of these interdependent factors.
[See for example: "The Macroeconomic Effects of Tax Changes: Estimates Based on a New Measure of Fiscal Shocks," Christina D. Romer, David H. Romer, in American Economic Review 100 (June 2010) Pgs 763-801.]
I think that's probably correct. We had huge stimulus in the form of stepped up spending on top of the tax cuts coming at a time when we were at virtually full employment. At the time, I was wondering what the economic response would be, as this was blazing new ground economically. The response was apparently very large deficits and some inflation, but muted and delayed.. . Then the Pandemic took hold, and that reduced the velocity of money. The Fed responded by curtailing it's bond selling program that it had only months before embarked on in a long range program to reduce its balance sheet and boost interest rates.. The Treasury responded with Covid relief payments which compensated for the drop in velocity and headed off what could potentially have become deflation and a depression. (This pandemic caused recession was peculiar, as it was largely a service sector and related recession.)And quite inconveniently the deficit skyrocketed entirely because of the Trump tax cuts.
