And it is because I do respect the office ... I have no respect whatsoever for the new officeholder.
Yes it is what it is - a disrespectful person voted into office.
But then again it could of been Shillary.
yellen not with Trump on $1 trillion infrastructure spending
- Thread starter S2007S
- Start date
Yes it is what it is - a disrespectful person voted into office.
But then again it could of been Shillary.
Wahhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!
Not that stupid. Rebuilding infrastructure creates jobs, more employment, more tax payers, less welfare. Not only construction jobs, analyze the trickle affect. More migrant workers means more travel, accommodation, services, equipment. The internal macro economics is staggering. The money used for rebuilding USA can come from the money spent on foreign aid. Why are we providing aid to foreigners that hate us. Don't get me wrong, we should still aid the needy, but lets tone it down to necessities, and look after America first! When we're super strong we can provide even more aid. Godspeed Mr Trump ...
Thanks for that.
Lol, of course......
The "great" public money spend effect. Instead of actually spending it on physical assets for the PEOPLE with the PEOPLES money, it clearly makes much more sense to inject cash into supporting or propping up the profiteers who take everything out of the system but put back the least.
And now as we have passed the point of any resemblance of positive return per public $ spent it only makes logical (FED) sense to double down and repeatedly inject ever increasing amounts into the system in the hope it will magically be profitable.
Its certainly "profitable" for some because they get to siphon out the public money being poured in to maintain the illusion. Which in turn results in ever increasing amounts needing to be poured in.
We supposedly live in a Capitalist system yet when the capitalist system tries to self regulate and clean out the dead and nonviable, those very same demand corporate socialism to save their failed models.
The definition of stupidity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.
Migrant workers? I thought they waz all gonna get deported?
According to most estimates that I have seen, the fiscal multiplier for infrastructure projects in the US is estimated at arnd 1.5. Moreover, given that debt/GDP is quite high, it's not clear that there's a lot of room. Finally, let's not forget that the Fed is unlikely to sit idly by and there will be at least some monetary offset.
True, all good points.
You do realize that the US war machine is by far and away the largest drain on the US economy right??
(I'm not saying foreign aid should not be cut but when looked at in context its a drop in the bucket in comparison to what is sucking the most money out of the system. )
And when you really look into its role and theaters of combat over the last 50yrs, 95% of those have been to extend CORPORATE interests, for CORPORATE profits. The current war in Syria is about creating the conditions to put a pipe line through to the EU energy market. The same as the Iraq war. This is all about the NeoCon agenda that has been pursued over the last 50+ yrs no matter what party or who is in power.
If the US spent 20% of its current military budget domestically on rebuilding the actual country, the US would be the unstoppable economic powerhouse it once was. If the military was maintained for ACTUAL defense of the country instead of pursuing interests that financial benefit a select few then we would suddenly see a very nice positive balance that could be used to actually reduce the national debt AND increase domestic spending to rebuild the US.
But the problem is that the military spending is such a cash cow for so many that whenever there are calls to cut spending, its invariable every other area that is cut and military spending increases.
"For example, increased defense spending after the 9/11 terror attacks in the United States contributed to the budget deficit. While the initial war in Afghanistan cost an estimated $33 billion, the later spending attributed to operations in Iraq cost $50 billion within the 2003 fiscal year. At the end of the George W. Bush presidency, the total spent reached $864.82 billion. Combined with the costs accrued during the Barack Obama presidency of $857 billion, the deficit increased approximately $1.8 trillion."
And what did we get for $1.8 trillion...? The rise of IS, the total destabilization of the middle east, a human tide of migrants fleeing the death and destruction and the one person who ensured that tide did not cross into Europe, Qaddafi, we watched as Clinton LAUGHED about him getting killed in a street. POS that he was, he was the only thing standing in the way all this time and protecting the EU from the majority of migrants trying to leave the middle east.
Of course this results in requiring even more military spending because of how destabilized the region has become, more foreign aid, more military aid..... and most importantly profits, profits, profits for those providing the hardware, logistics and support services. It really couldn't have turned out better for them if it had been planned......
There is plenty of money to rebuild the country. Waste, profiteering and special interests just need to be stopped and the US would once again be the strong powerhouse it once was. Got to get rid of the leaches first for that to even be a reality.
Trump..
1) nix Iran deal, remove Iranian supply push price of oil to 65... domestic production will increase and increasing oil/gas industry employment.
2) trillions will be printed to build up defense, and domestic infrastructure. Funneling money into blue collar labor. Mexicans/minorities/joe plumber will reap benefits from it. Most of the infrastructure projects will be revenue generating.
3) zero balance trade... if we purchase 100 billion in goods, you must purchase 100 billion in American goods..
4) reduce defense force projection expenditure, only deploy forces when it benefits America.
Just the above will push equities up another 20 percent from highs. Inflation in commodities will fuel growth in emerging markets and resource based first world countries.
Chris
1) nix Iran deal, remove Iranian supply push price of oil to 65... domestic production will increase and increasing oil/gas industry employment.
2) trillions will be printed to build up defense, and domestic infrastructure. Funneling money into blue collar labor. Mexicans/minorities/joe plumber will reap benefits from it. Most of the infrastructure projects will be revenue generating.
3) zero balance trade... if we purchase 100 billion in goods, you must purchase 100 billion in American goods..
4) reduce defense force projection expenditure, only deploy forces when it benefits America.
Just the above will push equities up another 20 percent from highs. Inflation in commodities will fuel growth in emerging markets and resource based first world countries.
Chris
Yes, in a nutshell, stop spending on other countries. Especially the countries that hate us. Let them fend for themselves, let countries number 2 and 3, protect them for awhile. Sure we can provide consultation but we need to get strong again. And protect our borders, we should lock down our borders to friendlies only. Military expenditures for defense continues as normal.
Increase demand side, through inflationary growth, ... no other way. Demographics of first world favors deflationary forces.
Ironic how inflation is reported. The last 5 years they say inflation is hovering around 1%. Not sure about others, my daily expenses increased by 20%. Only expense that went down is gas...