[marmico]

Energy per capita continues to degrade.

BS.

[Pops]

I just want to clarify that I don't think Trump is responsible for the coming economic crisis.

additional trillion dollar deficit every year, minimum
Inflation from tariffs on many items foreign and domestic inc food
oil price increase due to Iran sanctions, twit the cowardly lyin
" " " possible strait blockade
fewer migrant pickers= higher food prices
stronger $ (china battling tariffs) lower exports

but no collusion

[Ibon]

Trump has personally never went bankrupt.

Exactly

From the first article you linked to

"I have used the laws of this country just like the greatest people that you read about every day in business have used the laws of this country, the chapter laws, to do a great job for my company, my employees, myself and my family,” Trump said in August 2015.

The New York Times, which conducted an analysis of regulatory reviews, court records and security filings, found otherwise, however. It reported in 2016 that Trump "put up little of his own money, shifted personal debts to the casinos and collected millions of dollars in salary, bonuses and other payments."

"The burden of his failures," according to the newspaper, "fell on investors and others who had bet on his business acumen."

This is consistent with a man who serves himself and really only understands self serving strategies including being a parasite shifting his debts over to his failed enterprises and having investors take the loss, failing to pay his suppliers.

Yes Cog all legal and savvy. No argument there.

Exactly the kind of guy who will drain the swamp and help those poor deplorables.

[Cog]

Ahh so trump used the legal system of incorporation just like soros and your other lefties idols and it bothers you? Got it ibon.

Trump lives in your head rent free. Lol

[JuanP]

So, Pops, are you saying that the coming economic crisis wouldn't have happened if Trump wasn't president or that Trump is making things worse, but not necessarily causing the crisis. I think Trump may be aggravating the economic situation for the world, in general, and the USA, in particular, but I don't see him as the cause. The cause, IMO, is that today's global financial system is unsustainable because it is based on debt and continuous growth. Also, if Trump is slowing growth he may be actually buying time before it all blows up.

[Cog]

There is always a coming economic crisis of one sort or other, regardless of who is in power. But right now the USA has nearly full employment, US banks are solid, and US companies are recording record profits. If this is a crisis, then may I have another bowl please.

[Newfie]

At the core of humanities problems is our inability to limit ourselves. This plays out in many different scenarios but is leading to resource depletion, climate change, fiscal insolvency, and over population.

Because infinite growth is a physical impossiblility at the very least we need to find ways to stop growth. From all I know our capitalistic economic system, as we know it, requires growth to exist. There may be variation where we can exist in stasis but the transition from a growth model to a status model is difficult, never been done. The Chinese have tried with uneven success.

The most likely situation is that a sustainable population/production level is far below where we are ATM. This will require a prolonged degrowth period (sever depression) to reach sustainable levels where we then ramp up to statis.

In that context our booming economy is just the sound of the cannon that will kill many. Of course degrowth will reduce population. One should ask “Is it better to squelch a conception or to starve a child.”

[asg70]

I think Trump may be aggravating the economic situation for the world, in general, and the USA, in particular, but I don't see him as the cause.

His trade war with China isn't helping any.

[JuanP]

Cog, I think the economy has boom and bust cycles just like the oil industry. Right now we are in a boom so sooner or later we will move on to a bust.

[JuanP]

Newfie, I, esentially agree with your view. My wife and I had no children, and I had a Vasectomy, so I guess I am on the preventing conception group. I don't understand why you say that China tried to stop its growth, though. Are you referring to the one child program or to something else? I think today's China is completely growth oriented and growing very fast, too, regardless of their one child policy.
Today's system will have to crash and be reformed to deal with a no growth or degrowth scenario. A debt based system is not sustainable in the long run because it is based on growth. By the way, I prefer the word contraction to degrowth.

[JuanP]

asg70, I am conflicted on Trump's trade war. While I think he is doing this for the wrong reasons and I understand its short term costs, I also think that economies need to become more local and resilient and less global and based on JIT supply chains. I would prefer to have more self sufficient and less "efficient" economies, so I think trade tariffs may end up being good in the long run. I don't discount the temporary suffering implied by the process to get us there, thoug, but I think that are current situatio is completely unsustainable and a great degree of suffering is unavoidable at this point.

[Pops]

So, Pops, are you saying that the coming economic crisis wouldn't have happened if Trump wasn't president or that Trump is making things worse, but not necessarily causing the crisis. I think Trump may be aggravating the economic situation for the world, in general, and the USA, in particular, but I don't see him as the cause. The cause, IMO, is that today's global financial system is unsustainable because it is based on debt and continuous growth. Also, if Trump is slowing growth he may be actually buying time before it all blows up.

Juan, as you know, recessions are normal. Businesses/people/government invest/borrow/build and when that is overdone (which it invariably is) overall economic activity slows while the over-investment is erased. Normal.

Trump and the Rs aren’t slowing growth, they’re trying to supercharge returns to the ownership. As some have said, don’t take him literally, i.e.: he is not out for the average guy.



Tax cuts for the non-working 1% and the help of Ds who never met a "program" they didn't like will juice en economy that was plugging along fine. I saw this am that gdp growth could be 4-5% 2nd qtr.

Fed deficit borrowing will increase interest rates already on the way up.

But at the same time, he instigated a trade war that’s affecting everything unexpectedly, you might say “chaotically.”
Average washing machine price up from $320 to $420,
meat piling up in cold storage
bean prices down 30%
…because we’re in a trade war with everyone who imports from us (ag is one area where we do have a positive balance), and on and on will

The expansion was due for a reset already, expanding it without limit will only lead to a bigger pop.

[JuanP]

Pops, I agree with your last comment. I never believed Trump cares about the masses for a minute. I am particularly concerned by the fact that we seem to be inflating the biggest economic and financial bubbles ever; I fear the next bust could be really brutal. The growing federal deficit and debt combined with rising interest rates are very worrisome. I wonder what will happen to all that meat; I hope it doesn't go to waste.

[Pops]

they render the fat and make the rest into kibble for Fido

Soybeans have grown in acreage big time the last few years, that makes feed cheap, makes meat cheap, expands demand. Because meat takes from 30 days (hen) to several years to ramp up (beef) the expansion of the whole system from animals to facilities is like a big ocean wave. Throw up a wall like tariffs and there ain't no easy way out, lots of producers are going to be hurt.

[Cog]

Yes because unfair trade deals are so much better for the usa than tarriffs. Lol

[Pops]

I also think that economies need to become more local and resilient and less global and based on JIT supply chains. I would prefer to have more self sufficient and less "efficient" economies, so I think trade tariffs may end up being good in the long run. I don't discount the temporary suffering implied by the process to get us there, thoug, but I think that are current situatio is completely unsustainable and a great degree of suffering is unavoidable at this point.

The problem is that is not rump's goal, and besides, I don't believe Americans really want to become hunter gatherers right now, LOL. I agree with you that sometime down the road —barring the Energy Fairy pulling out a plum— we're going to get more local and less extravagant, but this isn't about that.

rump is about rump, when the economy expands his properties increase in value, if it crashes he just declares them bk and lays off the loss - why do you think he has 500 companies? His election was a result of the backlash at inequality and globalization and "elites", he happened to be in the right place with the right tweets. But his aim, in as much as he has one, is not to right those inequities. He panders to the "base" while enriching the elites, vastly increasing inequality, and lowering every regulation that hinders corporate profit.

But in the end he will perhaps be a catalyst, best I can hope.

[JuanP]

I agree that that is not Trump's goal or what the vast majority of Americans want, but he may end up doing some good, unwittingly, for the wrong reasons. And, yes, we are talking about a slow, long change.

[Newfie]

Juan,
Yes the 2 Child Policy. It is not completely gone, now it’s a 2 child policy. But the Chineeee apparently didn’t find the 1 child policy all that hurtful because apparently very, very few are taking advantage of the extra liberty. Also, there were already a lot of loop holes and exceptions. The goal was to halt their population at 700 million by 2050 I think. They are now about 1,200 millions. With roughly 1/16 the aerable land area per person of the USA, which itself is in over shoot.

[Outcast_Searcher]

Juan,
But the Chineeee apparently didn’t find the 1 child policy all that hurtful because apparently very, very few are taking advantage of the extra liberty. Also, there were already a lot of loop holes and exceptions. The goal was to halt their population at 700 million by 2050 I think. They are now about 1,200 millions.

Actually, it passed 1.4 billion (1,400 million) in 2017. I remember that because I was watching the population of China and India, trying to get a sense of third world population growth overall, since they're the major components. That surprised me -- I would have guessed the 1.2 billion if I hadn't been tracking it more recently.

As I understand it, China is trying to contend with the future big demographic problem of an aging population and far too few people to deal with all the elderly via its dropping of the 1 child policy. They are already having problems, which will likely get much worse. Lots of credible looking articles via Googling "china problems caring for the elderly".

Given that Japan is in a mad dash to try to solve their elderly care problem (more intense per capita but quite small compared to China in magnitude), hopefully if Japan succeeds, they will have a HUGE market in China (and the US re nursing homes trying to save money (and perhaps people who want to stay the hell away from nursing homes)).

Actually, China passed 1.4 billion (1,400 million) people in the 2016 / 2017 timeframe. I remember that because I was watching the population of China and India, trying to get a sense of third world population growth overall, since they're the major components. That surprised me -- I would have guessed the 1.2 billion if I hadn't been tracking it more recently. What I found scary was how rapidly the population continues to grow in absolute numbers.

Oh, and as of 2018, it looks like India is well past the 1.3 billion mark itself, and could well pass china in the coming decade.

http://www.worldometers.info/world-popu ... opulation/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_China

https://www.worldometers.info/world-pop ... opulation/