David - spare us. The MSM knows as much about economics as my 5-yr old cousin. The U.S. economy is growing between 4% and 5% while much of the world stagnates. And anyway, Trump's goal is not the maximiation of corporate profits, unlike you corporate MSM folks
-
-
-
That's not how Trump runs his own businesses.
-
Huh? Trump would of course run his own business to maximize profits. As President of the United States, his job is not to maximize corporate profits. Efficiency is not the end game. We don't want a country of elites and peasants, even if it's most efficient.
-
false choice. Very Obama like to offer false choices. ... and my point w/ Trump & how he runs his business is to point out that there's nothing wrong w/ trying to max corp profits. It's how business thrive and compete and stick around.
-
I don't understand what you mean. There is nothing wrong w/trying to maximize corporate proifts. All businesses should do that. But Trump is no longer a businessman. He's President. As President, his role is to improve life of U.S. citizens, not to maximize stock market profits
-
That was his point in CNBC interview (which was so good that the media didn't watch it). The stock market COULD be up 80%, not 40% if Trump wasn't challenging China. But his goal is to improve life for U.S. citizens - hence trade and immigration policies that benefit middle class
-
I don't pay for WaPo, but I have little sympathy for Big Ag. They are not the small time farmers of our imagination. The U.S. must have jobs for the part of the population that can't be doctors, lawyers or accountants. And those jobs can't just be McD's... people have pride
-
We just have basic disagreements about this. But as always, you argue well.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Trade war. Emphasis on war. If we were the type to retreat at the first soldier shot, we’d all be singing God save the Queen. We have the economy & market juiced for a reason. Any way it goes, we knock China down harder than they do us.
-
There are two arguments - one on policy and one on what other nations will acquiesce to. Being tested now. Both are dubious bets but there are legit differences of opinion on this & I guess we're going to find out.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
To be expected. Was always going to be necessary to subsidize the farmers through it, think of it as an investment. You can do your part to help. Go buy a brick of tofu or 75.
-
To be expected logically but not advertised that way. And there's a point there...
-
Not that it justifies anything, but looking back at Regan he didn’t exactly advertise having a fed spike interest rates to 20% in order to fix inflation & correct the imbalance in the economy but it’s what was needed.=> interesting glance back:https://www.nytimes.com/1982/05/15/us/reagan-hears-farmers-criticism-on-interest-rates-and-dairy-policy.html …
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
From the anti-welfare bunch. SMH.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.