Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
Wrong.
|
Look, if you can't even follow the numbers, why are you engaging in this discussion? Decemeber non-farm payrolls were at 145.3 million or about 7 million greater than the pre-recession peak. There are more people working today than ever before. And yet you see a hellscape in which no one has a job rather than a deep receission from which we're still recovering but have largely recovered from by any and all employment measures.
Quote:
|
We could have achieved a balance.
|
What amount of protectionism is "balance?" And are you really so naive as to think that had we just imposed tariffs on, say, steel, we'd be able to ward of the tide of woe that is automation? Why?
This is especially rich as you think "handouts" don't do any good, but apparently think a bit of symbolic handout to a small handful of workers would.
Come to think of it, that's pretty consistent with your story-telling view of how markets work. I'm sorry, but if you think economic anxiety is actually a part of the story, you're going to need more than a bit of symbolic protectionism to stem it.
Quote:
|
Not if the project is done using private development.
|
This is a non-sequitor. Was this in response to something else? What about private development makes with like the New Deal?
Quote:
|
We're not going to scale back SS.
|
We shall see. I wouldn't bet on anything right now.
Quote:
|
His cabinet did not bankrupt casinos.
|
Ah, I see. Mnuchin and Tillerson to the rescue, with an assist from Carson.
It's fascinating that you look at this guy and think his cabinet is influential. He's influenced by Fox News, Bannon and his kids. Which of those do you think are so graced with acumen?
