Thought Experiment-Biden as President
-
@taiwan_girl said in Thought Experiment-Biden as President:
@Jolly said in Thought Experiment-Biden as President:
By your yardstick, there are no great leaders.
Not at all. My comment was specifically related to the economics. If a plane or train or car is running straight down the highway on a sunlit day, you don't necessarily need to be a great driver to keep the car going at the right speed and in the right direction.
It is when the road is ice cover, there is an accident up ahead, a hurricane is in your path, then great driving skills are required.
Same with great leaders. In times of crisis are when you see who are great leaders. When you look back in history, and you think of great leaders, it is because they rose to some occasion.
Don't get me wrong, I do not think that Vice President Biden has the making of a great leader. Unfortunately, I do not think that President Trump has shown those trates either.
I know that @Horace orace and I have discussed this in circles previously (LOL). Yes, I agree that the president does have an impact on economy but not as much as people think. I am not saying that they have no impact!!!!
For example, in 1950, the US was almost 30% of world GDP. In 2008, it was about 18%. There are a lot of things that happen outside the control of the US that WILL impact the US economy.
For example, let us say that China and India go to war over what is happening in the Himalayas. What do you think will happen to the US economy? Is it President Trumps fault?
Or, lets say there is something like a global pandemic. What would happen to the US economy? Is it President Trumps fault?
Ok, so now you've admitted the President has an effect on the economy. All that's left is to quibble about how much...
@Jolly said in Thought Experiment-Biden as President:
Ok, so now you've admitted the President has an effect on the economy. All that's left is to quibble about how much...
Jolly, I have always said that (but am too lazy to go back to the former forum board to find my quotes form there. 5555). I just don't think that they have as much of an impact as they themselves (or others) like to claim.
If you are willing to say that President Trump had a great effect on the economy, then you have to "own" the fact that President Trump is doing a terrible job right now. Unemployment is worse than in eighty years, the US country is in a recession (almost close to depression), etc. etc.
I dont believe it is his fault and I place no blame with him for the current state.
If a President (Republic or Democrat) is going to accept credit for economic good things that happen on their term, then they have to be willing to stand up and accept the bad things also. As far as I know from an economy standpoint, when someone is elected President, it is not stated that they are only President when things are good.
-
@taiwan_girl said in Thought Experiment-Biden as President:
I dont believe it is his fault and I place no blame with him for the current state.
Then what are you arguing for or against, other than nothing matters?
TG, you are delightful, really. You are always considerate of the other side of an argument or position. -
If there was somehow a way to get data on all the drivers of the economy (or let's say the top 100) - you could run a regression on that data.
My view is similar to TG's - what you'd see is that the President is a non-zero coefficient, but other things like tech progress, size and health of global markets, earnings of domestic firms, etc., etc. - would dwarf any direct actions from the President.
Now you can see in the long arc of history the government sets the rules of the game (patent law, anti-trust law, regulations, etc., etc.) and the President has influence there - but those sort of changes have an effect on a scale of decades and even centuries.
In times of crises, the President's coefficient get's a lot bigger.
But if you were to make that equation, and look at the coefficient on Presidential actions - it wouldn't be accurate to say things like "Trump's economy" or "Obama's economy"
Maybe their coefficient is greater than any other single person - or maybe the Steve Jobs of the world beat them in some years.
-
Trump’s tax cuts moved enormous amounts of money around. Amounts that are on the order of a significant coefficient on the whole economy. You are free to argue the vagaries of all the effects that movement of that money had, but you’re not free to seriously claim that it was not important to the economy.
-
My view is similar to TG's - what you'd see is that the President is a non-zero coefficient, but other things like tech progress, size and health of global markets, earnings of domestic firms, etc., etc. - would dwarf any direct actions from the President.
You're too much into quantifiable metrics. Economies are made up of businesses. Businesses are made up of people. Predicting people is somewhat akin to herding cats.
I'm not market smart like Jon or Horace, but very, very seldom have I had a negative quarter. I'm much more of a gut investor than they are.
I do believe that perception drives reality and large groups of people sometimes have common perceptions that defy logic. Therefore, I do believe sentiment can drive the market and the economy.
-
Trump’s tax cuts moved enormous amounts of money around. Amounts that are on the order of a significant coefficient on the whole economy. You are free to argue the vagaries of all the effects that movement of that money had, but you’re not free to seriously claim that it was not important to the economy.
@Horace said in Thought Experiment-Biden as President:
Trump’s tax cuts moved enormous amounts of money around. Amounts that are on the order of a significant coefficient on the whole economy. You are free to argue the vagaries of all the effects that movement of that money had, but you’re not free to seriously claim that it was not important to the economy.
Tax policy won't turn a shithole country into a good one. In the grand scheme, it's tweaks around the edges.
Tax is a redistribution - in general a government is less efficient at allocating money, but taxed money doesn't disappear. It ends up in the pocket of a beaurocrat and goes back into the economy. Not saying it doesn't encourage growth - but it's not a magic wand.
Don't misunderstand my point - a tax cut can lead to capital moving into more productive areas, but even that takes time. The immediate effect is just money goes from person A to person B. As you said, in the short term it "moves" money.
-
My view is similar to TG's - what you'd see is that the President is a non-zero coefficient, but other things like tech progress, size and health of global markets, earnings of domestic firms, etc., etc. - would dwarf any direct actions from the President.
You're too much into quantifiable metrics. Economies are made up of businesses. Businesses are made up of people. Predicting people is somewhat akin to herding cats.
I'm not market smart like Jon or Horace, but very, very seldom have I had a negative quarter. I'm much more of a gut investor than they are.
I do believe that perception drives reality and large groups of people sometimes have common perceptions that defy logic. Therefore, I do believe sentiment can drive the market and the economy.
@Jolly said in Thought Experiment-Biden as President:
My view is similar to TG's - what you'd see is that the President is a non-zero coefficient, but other things like tech progress, size and health of global markets, earnings of domestic firms, etc., etc. - would dwarf any direct actions from the President.
You're too much into quantifiable metrics. Economies are made up of businesses. Businesses are made up of people. Predicting people is somewhat akin to herding cats.
I'm not market smart like Jon or Horace, but very, very seldom have I had a negative quarter. I'm much more of a gut investor than they are.
I do believe that perception drives reality and large groups of people sometimes have common perceptions that defy logic. Therefore, I do believe sentiment can drive the market and the economy.
The stock market is fine now. How's the economy?
-
@Jolly said in Thought Experiment-Biden as President:
My view is similar to TG's - what you'd see is that the President is a non-zero coefficient, but other things like tech progress, size and health of global markets, earnings of domestic firms, etc., etc. - would dwarf any direct actions from the President.
You're too much into quantifiable metrics. Economies are made up of businesses. Businesses are made up of people. Predicting people is somewhat akin to herding cats.
I'm not market smart like Jon or Horace, but very, very seldom have I had a negative quarter. I'm much more of a gut investor than they are.
I do believe that perception drives reality and large groups of people sometimes have common perceptions that defy logic. Therefore, I do believe sentiment can drive the market and the economy.
The stock market is fine now. How's the economy?
@xenon said in Thought Experiment-Biden as President:
@Jolly said in Thought Experiment-Biden as President:
My view is similar to TG's - what you'd see is that the President is a non-zero coefficient, but other things like tech progress, size and health of global markets, earnings of domestic firms, etc., etc. - would dwarf any direct actions from the President.
You're too much into quantifiable metrics. Economies are made up of businesses. Businesses are made up of people. Predicting people is somewhat akin to herding cats.
I'm not market smart like Jon or Horace, but very, very seldom have I had a negative quarter. I'm much more of a gut investor than they are.
I do believe that perception drives reality and large groups of people sometimes have common perceptions that defy logic. Therefore, I do believe sentiment can drive the market and the economy.
The stock market is fine now. How's the economy?
Quit moving the goalposts.
-
@xenon said in Thought Experiment-Biden as President:
@Jolly said in Thought Experiment-Biden as President:
My view is similar to TG's - what you'd see is that the President is a non-zero coefficient, but other things like tech progress, size and health of global markets, earnings of domestic firms, etc., etc. - would dwarf any direct actions from the President.
You're too much into quantifiable metrics. Economies are made up of businesses. Businesses are made up of people. Predicting people is somewhat akin to herding cats.
I'm not market smart like Jon or Horace, but very, very seldom have I had a negative quarter. I'm much more of a gut investor than they are.
I do believe that perception drives reality and large groups of people sometimes have common perceptions that defy logic. Therefore, I do believe sentiment can drive the market and the economy.
The stock market is fine now. How's the economy?
Quit moving the goalposts.
@Jolly I was reacting to your statement. Sentiment seems to drive the market to a greater degree than sentiment drives basic economic metrics.
But sure, sentiment is a driver. I think it's more of an outcome of a good economy though. Here's consumer sentiment. Obama years were steadily up after the financial crisis and Trump isn't that far off from Obama's figures in 2016
-
@Horace said in Thought Experiment-Biden as President:
Trump’s tax cuts moved enormous amounts of money around. Amounts that are on the order of a significant coefficient on the whole economy. You are free to argue the vagaries of all the effects that movement of that money had, but you’re not free to seriously claim that it was not important to the economy.
Tax policy won't turn a shithole country into a good one. In the grand scheme, it's tweaks around the edges.
Tax is a redistribution - in general a government is less efficient at allocating money, but taxed money doesn't disappear. It ends up in the pocket of a beaurocrat and goes back into the economy. Not saying it doesn't encourage growth - but it's not a magic wand.
Don't misunderstand my point - a tax cut can lead to capital moving into more productive areas, but even that takes time. The immediate effect is just money goes from person A to person B. As you said, in the short term it "moves" money.
@xenon said in Thought Experiment-Biden as President:
@Horace said in Thought Experiment-Biden as President:
Trump’s tax cuts moved enormous amounts of money around. Amounts that are on the order of a significant coefficient on the whole economy. You are free to argue the vagaries of all the effects that movement of that money had, but you’re not free to seriously claim that it was not important to the economy.
Tax policy won't turn a shithole country into a good one. In the grand scheme, it's tweaks around the edges.
Tax is a redistribution - in general a government is less efficient at allocating money, but taxed money doesn't disappear. It ends up in the pocket of a beaurocrat and goes back into the economy. Not saying it doesn't encourage growth - but it's not a magic wand.
Don't misunderstand my point - a tax cut can lead to capital moving into more productive areas, but even that takes time. The immediate effect is just money goes from person A to person B. As you said, in the short term it "moves" money.
Tax policy isn’t really important. Got it.
-
@xenon said in Thought Experiment-Biden as President:
@Horace said in Thought Experiment-Biden as President:
Trump’s tax cuts moved enormous amounts of money around. Amounts that are on the order of a significant coefficient on the whole economy. You are free to argue the vagaries of all the effects that movement of that money had, but you’re not free to seriously claim that it was not important to the economy.
Tax policy won't turn a shithole country into a good one. In the grand scheme, it's tweaks around the edges.
Tax is a redistribution - in general a government is less efficient at allocating money, but taxed money doesn't disappear. It ends up in the pocket of a beaurocrat and goes back into the economy. Not saying it doesn't encourage growth - but it's not a magic wand.
Don't misunderstand my point - a tax cut can lead to capital moving into more productive areas, but even that takes time. The immediate effect is just money goes from person A to person B. As you said, in the short term it "moves" money.
Tax policy isn’t really important. Got it.
@Horace That's one way to interpret what I said. If someone enacted some drastic marginal rate overhaul - sure, that'd be a big deal.
I'm talking about tax policy as I've seen it in my lifetime.
The economy over the last 20 years has been about a lot more than Obamacare and the Trump tax cuts. That's my point. Both those two were their respective biggest contributions to the state of the economy.
-
-
I struggle to see much tangible impact of presidents on my life, but I saw impact from those tax cuts.
@Horace said in Thought Experiment-Biden as President:
I struggle to see much tangible impact of presidents on my life, but I saw impact from those tax cuts.
And again, no one denies that. But if I look at my life, the amount of money I make has been driven by the growth of the tech economy, the rise of private equity, the change in real estate prices in urban markets. Among myriad others.
Has the Trump tax cut affected my life? Yes. Pretty small effect in the grand scheme of things.
I'm reacting to the sentiment that the President makes or breaks the economy. Affects it, sure.
-
Yes the printing press and the industrial revolution were more economically important than the tax policies of the day.
@Horace Exactly. This thing is designed to stand on the shoulder of giants and run itself without that much government (minimal if you're libertarian).
Presidents or seen as some sort of mythical shaper of destinies across the populace. It's kind of un-American.
If Trump (or Obama) took a 2 year vacation. Things would be just fine, the economy would be just fine.
-
@Horace said in Thought Experiment-Biden as President:
I struggle to see much tangible impact of presidents on my life, but I saw impact from those tax cuts.
And again, no one denies that. But if I look at my life, the amount of money I make has been driven by the growth of the tech economy, the rise of private equity, the change in real estate prices in urban markets. Among myriad others.
Has the Trump tax cut affected my life? Yes. Pretty small effect in the grand scheme of things.
I'm reacting to the sentiment that the President makes or breaks the economy. Affects it, sure.
@xenon said in [Thought Experiment-Biden as President]
I'm reacting to the sentiment that the President makes or breaks the economy.
Except a claim that they can have a meaningful effect - say, meaningful enough to possibly sway one’s vote - gets straw manned into that sentiment.
-
@xenon said in [Thought Experiment-Biden as President]
I'm reacting to the sentiment that the President makes or breaks the economy.
Except a claim that they can have a meaningful effect - say, meaningful enough to possibly sway one’s vote - gets straw manned into that sentiment.
@Horace said in Thought Experiment-Biden as President:
@xenon said in [Thought Experiment-Biden as President]
I'm reacting to the sentiment that the President makes or breaks the economy.
Except a claim that they can have a meaningful effect - say, meaningful enough to possibly sway one’s vote - gets straw manned into that sentiment.
I never implied it’s not meaningful enough to care about.
-
I’m sure you haven’t. I’m not sure we have any specific disagreement. TG doesn’t like it when people talk of the tangible effects of presidents on the economy and then others jump in to agree. Like it’s an important reminder that presidents don’t have magic wands.
-
If there was somehow a way to get data on all the drivers of the economy (or let's say the top 100) - you could run a regression on that data.
My view is similar to TG's - what you'd see is that the President is a non-zero coefficient, but other things like tech progress, size and health of global markets, earnings of domestic firms, etc., etc. - would dwarf any direct actions from the President.
Now you can see in the long arc of history the government sets the rules of the game (patent law, anti-trust law, regulations, etc., etc.) and the President has influence there - but those sort of changes have an effect on a scale of decades and even centuries.
In times of crises, the President's coefficient get's a lot bigger.
But if you were to make that equation, and look at the coefficient on Presidential actions - it wouldn't be accurate to say things like "Trump's economy" or "Obama's economy"
Maybe their coefficient is greater than any other single person - or maybe the Steve Jobs of the world beat them in some years.
@xenon said in Thought Experiment-Biden as President:
If there was somehow a way to get data on all the drivers of the economy (or let's say the top 100) - you could run a regression on that data.
My view is similar to TG's - what you'd see is that the President is a non-zero coefficient, but other things like tech progress, size and health of global markets, earnings of domestic firms, etc., etc. - would dwarf any direct actions from the President.
Now you can see in the long arc of history the government sets the rules of the game (patent law, anti-trust law, regulations, etc., etc.) and the President has influence there - but those sort of changes have an effect on a scale of decades and even centuries.
In times of crises, the President's coefficient get's a lot bigger.
But if you were to make that equation, and look at the coefficient on Presidential actions - it wouldn't be accurate to say things like "Trump's economy" or "Obama's economy"
Maybe their coefficient is greater than any other single person - or maybe the Steve Jobs of the world beat them in some years.
Thank you Xenon. You said it better than I ever could.
