[careinke]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', '[')As for President Elect Trumps tax plans they are so far as I can tell a milder form of the Reagan plan that set off a boom in USA manufacturing and employment in his first term. People around here have a tendency to forget that even in a stagnant world economy individual countries can experience growth. Note that during the last 10 years China and India have both grown considerably even as the world economy was pretty stagnant.

[careinke]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', 'S')trangely the republicans are taking us in the opposite direction of their vaunted ideal of free trade.

why would the anti tax party institute a regressive tax on consumers that benefits only government coffers?
You can't lift tariffs enough to offset labor differentials.

The problem with manufacturing from the workers standpoint is not ferigners it's automation

None of this makes sense, it is like trump convinced us all to put on blindfolds while he takes us on a ride to his alternate universe

ONLY I...

[careinke]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', 'J')eeze, I'm just freaking myself out, I may take up whiskey again

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')ut the 1928 comparison is instructive. It’s the last time a Republican president enjoyed anything like the majority Trump will have, particularly in the House.

And how did that work out for them?

Hoover took over in a time of general prosperity but stagnant wages and vast income inequality. Populists in Congress proposed dramatic increases in tariffs to help the struggling agricultural sector, the equivalent of today’s beleaguered blue-collar workers.

The proposal divided Republicans in Congress and Hoover before they produced the 1930 Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act, setting off retaliation, freezing international trade, contributing to the Great Depression and accelerating a ruinous cycle of nationalism around the world.

Hoover’s ghost should haunt the GOP right now. A populist, protectionist president has come to power at a time of long-depressed wages and vast inequality. He threatens to implement a 45 percent tariff against China and 35 percent against Mexico, and he’s about to collide with free-traders and pro-business interests in his own party.

[Pops]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('careinke', 'T')ariffs are a consumption tax, so I fully support them for that reason alone.

[Pops]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('careinke', 'T')hat would be great for the environment.

[Newfie]

Pops,
I'm sorry but I'm really having trouble with your posts. I can't tell anymore when you are being sarcartic or sincere.

I thought Carinke had a great post. Your response left me very confused about your actual thoughts, other than you are pissed off.

No need to do anything or respond, just thought you might (or might not) appreciate the friends feedback.

[Pops]

let me clarify, newf
I don't follow Alex Jones, I don't think it is good policy to trade good jobs for bad or impose a consumption tax on poor people or ignore the deficit or cause misery for the sake of the "environment."

Predicting the next great crash is the central conceit of this site, the hunt for the black swan always has been the focus. I hear the wings flapping more now than any time since '08 - or maybe before.

[dinopello]

I think if Trump gets his way, the economy won't crash anytime soon. Trump wants massive new federal spending (on infrastructure and defense) - it is his nature and that was in his policy statements. That would be a boon to the economy. The type of spending on infrastructure is what Obama always wanted but could never get through congress. Construction and defense-related stocks have already spiked in anticipation.

It remains to be seen how the congress will respond to Trumps spending requests - and then what Trumps reaction to that will be. I think Trump could actually put the kind of political pressure on recalcitrant republicans that Obama simply couldn't. And, he will happily work with Democrats.

Obama would have wanted to raise taxes to pay for the spending but Trump will gladly use debt financing. The real-estate mogul made his fortune leveraging debt and he has promised to do the same for America. Then, when the crash does come it might be a tad harder - but we will have nice new bridges and roads - and of course, a terrific wall.

[Cog]

Trump believes his plans will increase GDP by 4-5% a year. The additional tax revenues from that growth will result in no deficit increases. We will see.

[evilgenius]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Pops', 'T')here is no equivalency between Obama and D campaign promises and statements in the 08 election and those of trump and I dare you to show me wrong

trump has shown an indifference not only to civility and social norms but to simple fact, the functions of government and the constitution

You can choose to believe that every promise made is a lie and this is just more of the same old same.

I on the other take him at his word.

[Hawkcreek]

Its kind of funny that no one has questioned the title of the thread. Everyone seems to accept that a crash will happen, and is just arguing about when it will happen.
That by itself is the scariest part. All these different, ego driven, wordsmiths are allied in believing that a crash will happen. It seems that no one even questions it any more.
I intend to make myself believe that it isn't gonna happen (it will probably take a lot of recreational pot here in this great state of Washington), but if I close my eyes and repeat it firmly and loudly enough, the crash will go away.
Ok, just trying to add a little humor.

[GHung]

Hawk said; "Everyone seems to accept that a crash will happen, and is just arguing about when it will happen."

Since virtually every economy in history has crashed at one time or another, it's a very good bet this one will too. Considering its size, it has a good chance of crashing spectacularly at some point.

[SumYunGai]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Hawkcreek', 'I')ts kind of funny that no one has questioned the title of the thread. Everyone seems to accept that a crash will happen, and is just arguing about when it will happen.

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Hawkcreek', 'I')ts kind of funny that no one has questioned the title of the thread. Everyone seems to accept that a crash will happen, and is just arguing about when it will happen.
That by itself is the scariest part. All these different, ego driven, wordsmiths are allied in believing that a crash will happen. It seems that no one even questions it any more.
I intend to make myself believe that it isn't gonna happen (it will probably take a lot of recreational pot here in this great state of Washington), but if I close my eyes and repeat it firmly and loudly enough, the crash will go away.
Ok, just trying to add a little humor.

[GHung]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Hawkcreek', 'I')ts kind of funny that no one has questioned the title of the thread. Everyone seems to accept that a crash will happen, and is just arguing about when it will happen.
That by itself is the scariest part. All these different, ego driven, wordsmiths are allied in believing that a crash will happen. It seems that no one even questions it any more.
I intend to make myself believe that it isn't gonna happen (it will probably take a lot of recreational pot here in this great state of Washington), but if I close my eyes and repeat it firmly and loudly enough, the crash will go away.
Ok, just trying to add a little humor.

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('GHung', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Hawkcreek', 'I')ts kind of funny that no one has questioned the title of the thread. Everyone seems to accept that a crash will happen, and is just arguing about when it will happen.
That by itself is the scariest part. All these different, ego driven, wordsmiths are allied in believing that a crash will happen. It seems that no one even questions it any more.
I intend to make myself believe that it isn't gonna happen (it will probably take a lot of recreational pot here in this great state of Washington), but if I close my eyes and repeat it firmly and loudly enough, the crash will go away.
Ok, just trying to add a little humor.

[GHung]

"That is provided we are not talking something like a dinosaur killer asteroid impact or Yellowstone super volcanic eruption."

....or nuclear war. I understand that humans are adept at muddling through hard times, collectively, and a big part of that is individual/group resilience. I also don't disagree that, barring catastrophe, many will persist. My question is; what scale of recovery will be possible considering our consumption of everything over the last two hundred years. Pretty much of the low-hanging fruit is gone, some forever, and that means whatever civilizations reform after a collapse will be limited to pre-industrial levels until humans develop some very different ways of doing things. We're doomed to undergo some severe behavior modifications, collectively. I think that Greer's dark age scenarios are highly likely before major civilisations can evolve 'new deals' with what the planet can support in real time.

By the way, I see your 'triage' meme (governments prioritizing resource distribution) as being necessary, but temporary, solutions, and that our level of overshoot is underestimated by many.

[careinke]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Hawkcreek', 'I')ts kind of funny that no one has questioned the title of the thread. Everyone seems to accept that a crash will happen, and is just arguing about when it will happen.
That by itself is the scariest part. All these different, ego driven, wordsmiths are allied in believing that a crash will happen. It seems that no one even questions it any more.
I intend to make myself believe that it isn't gonna happen (it will probably take a lot of recreational pot here in this great state of Washington), but if I close my eyes and repeat it firmly and loudly enough, the crash will go away.
Ok, just trying to add a little humor.

[SumYunGai]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', 'T')hat being said the idea that Uncle Sam or Vlad the Putin will supply fuel to average consumers to fritter away in a shortage instead of supplying the farms and military first is just nutty IMO. Yeah rationing stinks, but going hungry and being invaded by the ravening hoards from Canada stinks much worse It would take a long time post peak for the governments anywhere to not have fuel for farming and military defense operations.

[onlooker]

Okay, I see a bit both sides of your arguments Tanada and Sum. First on the pessimistic side, the electrical grid is a key weak point as so much of our civilization and its routine necessary functions are tied to the Grid. Second, JIT does put an element of danger and chaos into the Equation. Now, for the optimistic stance. Sum your assertions while not faulty in logic presumes lack of adaptation and pre-planning. I expect that the US economy and others will quickly transition to a more Command type economy. It seems inevitable. By doing so, the eventualities that Tanada assumes will be realized. Priority will be given to food, military and in some cases health services. Again if we compare countries we must look at countries with strong stable governments and an existing infrastructure to ameliorate the worse of what is to come. I believe the US is one such country. Also, remember that once international trade breaks down those countries that can hold on, will be those that have a relatively favorable resource to population ratio. I think generally this describes the Western Hemisphere in contrast to the Eastern Hemisphere. So, I see a mixed bag and feel that Canada and US are probably as well positioned as anyone to withstand the more dire outcomes. Of course it will NOT be a picnic anywhere.