Trump

[heironymouspasparagus]

Yellen (not some coo coo blog) is proposing allowing the fed to purchase equities. Now, get over yourselves and discuss this real possibility discussed by real people.

Or does this not disturb anyone? Say it does come to be. Are you ok with it?

Since Trump has been saying he is gonna negotiate the Fed debt, and pay pennies on the dollar, yeah - purchasing equities IS the voice of sanity in that scenario.

[erfalf]

Since Trump has been saying he is gonna negotiate the Fed debt, and pay pennies on the dollar, yeah - purchasing equities IS the voice of sanity in that scenario.

How does one have to do with the other?

[Hoss]

Yellen (not some coo coo blog) is proposing allowing the fed to purchase equities. Now, get over yourselves and discuss this real possibility discussed by real people.

Or does this not disturb anyone? Say it does come to be. Are you ok with it?

Are you ok with this?

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/09/donald-trump-scandals/474726/

[AquaMan]

Erf, I read their "manifesto" and then perused their comments section. After that the credibility rating dropped precipitously. I am not qualified to comment on any of the financial decisions that Yellen, Obama or anyone in the Fed is making, which makes me in the same class as Trump. So, I won't. Just commenting on the tenor of the website and its participants.

[erfalf]

Erf, I read their "manifesto" and then perused their comments section. After that the credibility rating dropped precipitously. I am not qualified to comment on any of the financial decisions that Yellen, Obama or anyone in the Fed is making, which makes me in the same class as Trump. So, I won't. Just commenting on the tenor of the website and its participants.

I couldn't find the CNBC host video feed anywhere else. It was the top link in Google. I honestly don't vouch for it's cred. But I do of CNBC. Which was really the point. Poor vehicle for sure. But the point still remains.

[erfalf]

Erf, I read their "manifesto" and then perused their comments section. After that the credibility rating dropped precipitously. I am not qualified to comment on any of the financial decisions that Yellen, Obama or anyone in the Fed is making, which makes me in the same class as Trump. So, I won't. Just commenting on the tenor of the website and its participants.

Double post

[erfalf]

Are you ok with this?

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2016/09/donald-trump-scandals/474726/

[AquaMan]

I couldn't find the CNBC host video feed anywhere else. It was the top link in Google. I honestly don't vouch for it's cred. But I do of CNBC. Which was really the point. Poor vehicle for sure. But the point still remains.

Ok. CNBC is something I sometimes watch and have no problem with. There still is this problem of the common folk really having little understanding of global financial issues, much less domestic ones. This is simply not a conversation that one should participate in without intimate knowledge of the complex machinations and the players.

So, that means two things. One, I'm out. And Two, regardless of the level of understanding the topic, comments in an election year are likely to be politically motivated. Lets just stipulate, I agree with the moderate liberal comments!

[swake]

I couldn't find the CNBC host video feed anywhere else. It was the top link in Google. I honestly don't vouch for it's cred. But I do of CNBC. Which was really the point. Poor vehicle for sure. But the point still remains.

Rick Santelli? He's the "founder" of the tea party movement and if he had his way we would have let the banking sector melt down and we would be in the worst depression in the history of the world. He's a libertarian ideologue and an idiot.  

Not credible.

Nearly all top economists think Trumps plans are stupid and would blow up the debt and create a new recession.

And Clinton didn't appoint Yellen anyway. Who would Trump appoint? Captain Crunch? He certainly has done a terrible job staffing his campaign, 90% of the people working for him are a complete embarrassment. He's currently got a White Supremacist as the president of his campaign, his former campaign chief assaulted a report from Breitbart(pancakes?), and here are his main spokespeople:


Says Who?

And Katrina Peirson


Seriously.

[erfalf]

Alright then everyone. I'll mark you down for no opinion. You all would rather talk about sex tapes and crap than anything that might actually affect your lives.

I thought you all griped and moaned about the bailouts. This is like proposing perpetual bailouts, non-congress approved perpetual bailouts. I understand Clinton didn't appoint her directly. I'm just going to venture over into la-la land and assume you (swake) think she would have appointed the second coming of Milton Friedman. Ha.

You made a note to mention how my hatred for Hillary was showing the other day, well... your brown nose is showing. Any attack on anything Democrat is rebuffed with an attack (unrelated mind you) on Trump/Republican. It old and tired now.

While I completely understand that BOTH candidates are incredibly flawed, I do from time to time want to talk about serious issues. This is incredibly serious if this were to come to fruition. And Clinton in my view would offer nothing to stop it, and would likely favor such a policy. I have a feeling she would never admit to that prior to the election. I am also fairly certain NO ONE will ask her. Only CNBC and spook blogs have even mentioned this. And more than just Santeli at CNBC think this is just bailouts squared, and an incredibly bad idea.

[Hoss]

So, you're saying someone who fires off tweetstorms at 3am asking his followers to watch a sex tape of a pageant winner, has all manner of scandals following him (not that Hillary doesn't have some) is someone you'd vote for?

I guess I'm not surprised if that's the case.  I'd have hoped you were smarter than that.  This guy is a serial liar.  Even more so than most politicians.

Now that the media are FINALLY starting to fact check him (hell, that only took 15 months) things are not looking quite so rosy.   You know you're bad when USA Today's editors unanimously reject you in favor of the other flawed candidate.

[swake]

Alright then everyone. I'll mark you down for no opinion. You all would rather talk about sex tapes and crap than anything that might actually affect your lives.

I thought you all griped and moaned about the bailouts. This is like proposing perpetual bailouts, non-congress approved perpetual bailouts. I understand Clinton didn't appoint her directly. I'm just going to venture over into la-la land and assume you (swake) think she would have appointed the second coming of Milton Friedman. Ha.

You made a note to mention how my hatred for Hillary was showing the other day, well... your brown nose is showing. Any attack on anything Democrat is rebuffed with an attack (unrelated mind you) on Trump/Republican. It old and tired now.

While I completely understand that BOTH candidates are incredibly flawed, I do from time to time want to talk about serious issues. This is incredibly serious if this were to come to fruition. And Clinton in my view would offer nothing to stop it, and would likely favor such a policy. I have a feeling she would never admit to that prior to the election. I am also fairly certain NO ONE will ask her. Only CNBC and spook blogs have even mentioned this. And more than just Santeli at CNBC think this is just bailouts squared, and an incredibly bad idea.

You have raised a very serious issue, who would Trump appoint. Look at who he has hired to this point. That should give you serious pause.

I was not against the bailouts. They may not have been popular, but they were needed. The problem was that we didn't have enough stimulus and then as soon as the economy was starting to recover we had the Republican forced austerity measures and worse the threats to shut down government and then the actual shutting down of government.

I'm no fan of Friedman. He gave us the crap that is "Trickle Down", which has created the massive income inequality we have today. He has been proven very wrong over the last 30+ years.

Another serious issue, Trump's plan, so far as we know and where it stands today, will double down on trickle down with even more tax cuts on the rich and corporations while weakening labor and environmental protections.  Most top economists agree he will blow a five trillion dollar hole in the budget and send us into another recession.

[swake]

Forbes on the candidates economic plans:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/maggiemcgrath/2016/07/29/moodys-where-trumps-economic-policies-might-spark-recession-clintons-could-boost-gdp-and-lower-unemployment/#209d0ccb2348

Time:
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/08/opinions/trump-economic-policy-miron/

The WSJ:
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2016/06/20/u-s-economy-would-be-diminished-under-trumps-economic-plan-new-analysis-says/

[erfalf]

Forbes on the candidates economic plans:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/maggiemcgrath/2016/07/29/moodys-where-trumps-economic-policies-might-spark-recession-clintons-could-boost-gdp-and-lower-unemployment/#209d0ccb2348

Time:
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/08/opinions/trump-economic-policy-miron/

The WSJ:
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2016/06/20/u-s-economy-would-be-diminished-under-trumps-economic-plan-new-analysis-says/

So we're rolling out Moody's analyst. Ok.  They really can see what's coming down the pike (CDO anyone). And name me one specific policy that Friedmam advocated for that could directly be tied to anything. I could argue that doing the opposite of what he said hasn't exactly been a spectacular success either.

And not that this really makes a heck of a lot of difference, but the author of that report is a Hillary donor.

[swake]

So we're rolling out Moody's analyst. Ok.  They really can see what's coming down the pike (CDO anyone). And name me one specific policy that Friedmam advocated for that could directly be tied to anything. I could argue that doing the opposite of what he said hasn't exactly been a spectacular success either.

And not that this really makes a heck of a lot of difference, but the author of that report is a Hillary donor.

Running an analysis that Trump is going to run up the debt another five trillion while pushing us into recession might push a lot of people to donate to Clinton.