Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
I think it's pretty clear what happens in the first two years of Trump. First, he inherits a pretty strong economy, but also one tiring near the end of the cycle. He gets the benefit of some initial exuberance, especially from investors who are hopeful he's going to do what they want. Then he gets sugar highs into the economy from two sources: first, a tax cut that puts a couple trillion dollars in the hands of corporations and wealthy individuals, something that won't have a long term effect but does put some money out there, and second, a bunch of economic shifts that occur in anticipation of a trade war - things like the Chinese stocking up on soy just before the tariffs hit (and that series of purchases added nearly a full percent to GDP in a single quarter).
Unfortunately, besides these just being sugar highs, we're also seeing the slow gutting of the jobs created by the ACA, hitting on a state-by-state basis.
So, in the second two years, he has to move from sugar highs to coke highs or he has to deal with some of the inevitable retrenching, like post-Brownback Kansas. Guess which one he is going to go for?
|
I agree with much of this. I also agree that he will go from sugar to coke to meth to to keep the numbers where he thinks they ought to be. He knows that if the economy tanks, given his fragile popularity, he's toast.
I don't think gutting ACA jobs is a big deal. HC has low multiplier effect. If Trump would get off his ass on infrastructure, he could produce 1/2 the number of those ACA jobs with 3X the multiplier effect.
But my main point was on sentiment. For reasons I cannot grasp, he's shifted sentiment among business owners. It should not work. Particularly in development, the cost increases from the tariffs (between 10-20%) should have strong negative impact. But so far? Not seeing it. But YMMV. And it's still early. Maybe it's coming. But maybe not.
