Economy emerges as bright spot for Trump

That is all very nice news
How did Trump influence such a surge?

>>148805
>>148806
Economic wizard

>>148806
He's cutting regulations/red tape like mad. I work in building and construction. The reduction in paperwork has increased our offices profitability like 30% since February.

>>148806
Because Republicans understand that economic darwinism works. The weak perish and the strong succeed. That is the natural way of the markets and life. Any deviation from this is an aberration that introduces inefficiencies and hobbles the markets.

just continued momentum from Obama's term.
http://adamhartung.com/wp-content/uploads/Successful-Presidency.jpg

We had achieved almost full employment by the end, and GDP growth was among the highest in Western economies, along with unprecedented consumer protections, banking regulations, and for the first time in US history a pathway toward universal healthcare coverage.

As a consumer economy, increasing protections for the working class is the predominant driver of growth, since they're the ones that spend the largest share of their income.

>>148809
You're full of shit, shill. Municipalities lower than state level control fucking paperwork, you're assuming most of the idiots who'll read your post won't know that.

Still Obama fiscal year.

>>148820
and yet the stocks respond with confidence - confidence they see in Trump

>>148813
When they remove requirements to upgrade to a more advanced (higher demanding) energy code - the municipality makes the decision. They trans bathroom decision nix helped alot too because that meant adding a whole extra bathroom w/ plumbing reqs.

On top of that, the motivation towards growth is higher and the mood is elevated all around.

>>148823
Wouldn't a CONSTRUCTION firm make MORE money for building an ADDITIONAL bathroom?

You're a shill, so it's obvious you're going to hit shill buttons to fleece idiots, but you aren't posting like anyone working in construction would.

Mood? Motivation toward growth? Are you fucking chinese?

Attention, idiots: shills aren't trying hard enough ITT

>>148825
No because were an architecture and design firm and we have clients who will scrap projects if the cost is too high dipshit

>>148822
Confidence they see in the way Trump is destroying regulations and consumer protections which will allow them to exploit the American people and skyrocket their own profits, yes.

>>148873
Regulations need balance. We've been adding more and more and more with no oversight.

You are now aware that 7 of the 10 biggest components of the S&P 500 are TECH COMPANIES. Companies that actively dislike trump and his policies. Companies that are going to grow massively over the next decade regardless of who's chimping out in DC.

If you look at the stocks that represent the reflationary trump trade (banks, industrials, transports, etc) they're all pretty stagnant YTD since trump's economic policies (what little info there is) get shot down one by one. Of course since you know fuck all about the market and are just drinking the kool-aid of this somehow being a trump report card, none of this matters to you.

>>148873
>Confidence they see in the way Trump is destroying regulations and consumer protections
Good, the markets don't need the government telling them what to do. Regulations are all about control, not protection.

>which will allow them to exploit the American people
You mean by selling them higher quality products? Look, you aren't forced to buy something if you disagree with a corporations practices.

>skyrocket their own profits,
How is this a bad thing unless you want mandated inefficiencies?

>>148834
As soon as you feel like you're not making sense, you change your message, huh?

Building and construction ≠ architecture and design. They're related, but almost universally separate in businesses operated.

Which is fine, you'll just post some other bullshit about "growth" in an industry dominated by housing which isn't affected by the kinds of regulation you're referencing.

Shill away, sir.

>Were, we're
English as a second language sure is tough, huh?

>>148939
Are you retarded? Architecture is like textbook "in the construction business"

And then you comment on his grammar because you're a fucking dumbass

>>148943
Having worked in construction, development, and planning, architecture is definitely idealist bullshit compared to construction.

Crews build what they'll build, until the money in a project is big enough to require tighter tolerances

>>148943
>Politics are a great substitute for actual knowledge!
>Dunning-Kruger? Who're they?

>>148935
>Regulations are all about control, not protection.
These aren't mutually exclusive.

>Look, you aren't forced to buy something if you disagree with a corporations practices.
Yes I am. The only cable internet provider in my area is Comcast, and they lobbied for the repeal of net neutrality.

If I am incapacitated, and have to be taken to a hospital, I don't have the ability to research costs of procedures or competence of staff and technologies of where I'm going.

I don't want to have to do research into where every restaurant and every friend sources their food, whether their milk is pasteurized properly. When I'm moving, I don't want to have to be an expert into which industries are dumping what in the area or the potential health hazards of what's in the groundwater.
I don't want to have to worry about what's in my pharmaceuticals and imports.

And as a businessman,I don't want to have to do research into climate science and find folks to evaluate my practices for how they may be influencing the environment and my community.

I don't like the idea of my elderly mother being swindled out of retirement money by shifty business practices.

I don't want to be a statistic where I get sick because a moronic business owner produced something rancid and sold it to me. Even if he goes out of business afterwards because the free market happens and people say "oh, let's not buy from that fucker, that other unfortunate fucker died from his shit". I'm still sick and I expect him to make me whole but moreover someone should have been vetting his practices and expertise before he sold anything.

I like having homogeneity enforced by government across society because I can't be an expert in everything and don't have the time or energy to try. So I pool my money with other people through what are called taxes, we superimpose a regulatory structure on our society, because then my quality of life is much higher and I have a lot more freedom to spend my life as I wish.

>>148953
It's not even the point?

many of said the most important word business. As a business mongal this is all trump knows and understand. the wall business jobs money. coal metal and so on business related. Not so much government work is happening is his cabinet. other than firing, trying to pass travel bans (that dont work) rehiring his own staff because thous that know donald understand silence is golden and tweeting we sould appologize to him leaking fake news. give me a break. the guy is a joke with now a fier complex. he wont resign, donald is above that an a impeachment could take a year. america will be turning into the movie idiotocrasy soon.

>>148955
Which implies that you're instead specializing in an area of the economy where you are most capable, and are more productive because you can focus on it. Everyone does what they do best and exchanges fiat for the rest? What is this concept a major pillar of, for five dollars?

DING DING DING it's the free market!

>>149014
Well, economically, conservatives want freedom from authority (government mostly, though some acknowledge the coercive power a nongovernmental entity can have) while liberals aspire to have freedom from want.

>>148974
A market economy has benefits and I don't believe government should micromanage everything, I have never opined for such a thing, but sophisticated regulation and social programs should be superimposed wherever reasonable, that is equally essential to a society where I'm as free and enjoy as high a quality of life as possible, and one in which I can be more confident that future generations will enjoy the same peace of mind. Not to mention, the suffering of non-human living things will be taken into consideration regardless of the personal whims of my neighbor.

>>149015
I know you're replying to
>>149017

I do not know there is a way to reconcile this without secession.

>>149018
too messy and probably unnecessary.
plus the ideological divide is not neatly geographical north/south so that some states can simply break off.
just let state governments decide for themselves the sort of society they want.

>>149019
What about issues like immigration?
Individual states might decide their own economic policies but once you're naturalized in one state, that's recognized in all states of the same country.
How do we reconcile a deep division between left and right on something like immigration?
What if one state decides you might be OK with more diversity in your state, but we want something different in ours, how do you reconcile that with an immigration policy that's the same in all states?

Let's hope the economy is bullish for real reasons and there won't be a reaction a year or 2 down the line.

>>148805
finally jobs are returning to our land. more american workers and pays to our economy. Trump is showing good results

>>149047
Well, he could change nothing and the economy would continue to grow, but unless he seriously fucks things up, I'd imagine what he's doing is going to have some positive impact on the economy in the short run because he's basically throwing out every regulation he has any immediate authority to.

That's going to produce some more commerce in the short run but we're definitely going to hurt in the long-term for valuing economy over the environment even in those specific circumstances where it's established that a particular practice is damaging.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-administration-cancels-new-protection-for-endangered-whales-and-sea-turtles-west-coast/

Eliminating regulation surrounding the use of nets that are multiple kilometers wide and just dredge the ocean for whatever they can is going to provide some smudge of additional productivity. Folks will maybe eat swordfish instead of some cheaper seafood a little more often and in exchange we'll lose irreplaceable biodiversity, like some species of whale will go extinct.

I haven't read the details every regulation Trump has eliminated, but I don't know that I can trust he's done his research and from what I have read, I generally don't think that path to higher productivity is worth it. Technology will always improve and with it our lives, but an extinct species is some information that will be lost to our universe for all time and something we cannot hope to replicate.

I don't know that we have to grow infinitely faster, many countries do more to deliver an excellent quality of life for all citizens with even lower per capita income. I don't see the point, and don't want to sacrifice ecology for that. Fast growth is great when we can figure out how to balance it optimally with our other priorities. I just don't live for the purpose of maximizing my efficiency.

>>149035
Hard to see a reason for stock market to be bullish besides that Trump has promised deregulation, and investors from large banks/hedge funds are the exact people who benefit from deregulation, and the people who control whether market is bullish...

Productivity growth is still horrible and people are still leaving the labor force. When these underlying factors become apparent there will likely be the reaction you speak of

>>148810
If Republicans were able to grasp Darwinism at work in the economy (they can't–why should anyone believe that if most of them can't grasp natural Darwinism seen in every ecosystem in nature), then why did they spend over a decade propping up shitty banks whose deregulation helped saturate the market with sub-prime mortgages causing everyone to lose money? Why didn't they let the big automakers fail in a downturn after they refused to adapt to a shifting manufacturing/energy landscape and couldn't survive the recession on their own, bailing them out with 81 billion tax-paying dollars instead (Inb4 "most of it was paid back")? Why is it that any Republican with a spotlight on them always happens to have the biggest economic speculatory lobbyist cock in their mouth? Why have they held opportunities to get ahead in America back for 40 years by appealing to the lowest common denominator of all mindless, scared simpletons who they know will vote for them not based on any tangible economic principle, but with stupid wedge issues that have no basis in science or reality? The left aren't the only ones paralyzed by bad economics with identity politics.

>>148809

As an architect this is not how construction fucking works you brainless idiot.

This attempt at lauding Trump by conjuring a fictional story is so transparent and pathetic that it's laughable.

>>149058
>Held opportunities to get ahead in America back by appealing to the lowest common denominator

Looking at the last election cycle I would say nothing parties are guilty of fear mongering. Also your definition of "holding back progress" is deeply personal as many people do not want to see the country drift down the road that is being advocated for by progressives. Also there is something to be said for respecting a tug of war with regards to policy as it keeps things moving at a pace where it does not go too far too fast.

>>149072
Meh, they did the same thing with Obama when the recession was ending. If anyone thinks the president can directly have a drastic impact on the economy they are foolish. Sure they have some influence, but it is not as much as people like to make it out to be.

>>148929
I agree, but the answer is absolutely not to burn everything to the ground the way republicans in congress seem to be so keen on.

>>148955
>>149017
Great posts. This shows why some government regulation is so necessary in the average citizen's life. When it becomes an uphill battle to remain healthy, educated, and financially stable due to a complete lack of restraints on the free market, how exactly does that result in a stronger society? And if it can't, how can that translate to a greater America?

>>149052
Likewise, there are some false dichotomies being thrown around by conservatives such as 'environmentalism' being the enemy of 'progress'. Developing technologies with the priority of creating less waste and environmental damage will logically result in efficient industry and thus greater prosperity. Even if you didn't give a shit about 'global warming', why should you refuse better alternatives to systems dependent on antiquated power-sources like coal, which is mined at a significant human cost?

>>148935
>Regulations are all about control, not protection.
Which is why we have so many laws against things like murder and burglary, right? To control the population rather than protect them, right?

>>149091
Laws =\= regulations

>>149091
Yeah not the same thing at all

>>149098
>>149103
Regulations are created to enforce laws, so if you break one you're effectively breaking the law that created it. And although the purview of environmental law is different from criminal law, both share the common quality of protecting citizens from harm, so the point made by >>149091 still stands. As the latter makes killing you for money or other motives illegal, so does the former prevent parties from contaminating your drinking water with excessive levels of chemical pollutants.

Testing for and reducing pollution costs money, and thus companies do whatever they can to subvert regulations. And if they're already getting away with murder even when they're established (think back to the Volkswagen emissions scandal), imagine how much more dangerous life is going to get for the average person if the rulebook is burnt altogether.

Actually, there's no need to imagine; just look at China, where the government lets companies do as much as they can pay for. Why do you think Chinese people prefer using imported foreign goods instead of domestic products? Surely it couldn't be due to a lack of trust caused by weak regulations, could it?

>>149111
Idk man, go live in China and see if you like it

>>149117
That's the thing; I have lived in China before, and seen the effects of rampant corruption and the people's resentment first-hand. The entire system is rotten, from the chiefs in their villages to the elites in the Politburo. Money and power go hand in hand, with industrialists and politicians leaning on each other to get ahead at the expense of the citizenry. It's so bad that Xi Jinping, the current Premier, effectively rose to power on an anti-corruption platform, and even then one could argue most prosecutions are really veiled purges of rival faction members.

This incestuous crony culture will become the state of affairs in America if hardcore Republicans and their backers get their way. They have made it abundantly clear by their praise of Russia's highly similar oligarchy; if you think the swamp's getting deeper now, wait 'til they've moved the government to Florida.

>>149133
If you think it's just Republicans then you're living in an ideological wasteland

>>149168
Whataboutism, whataboutism, and more whataboutism. Whose party is calling the shots now? Whose cabinet is filled with inexperienced multi-millionaires with personal agendas right now? Whose party is being influenced by right-wing activists like the Kochs, and possibly the Russians, right now? Whose party is actively derailing America's long-term progress with their idiotic legislation right now?

As you guys keep saying, Hillary and the Democrats lost, and Trump and the Republicans won. So why don't you stop shirking the issue and accept that the latter are purely responsible for the mess they've gotten themselves into?

>>149087
>many people do not want to see the country drift down the road that is being advocated for by progressives
So clinging to the dying coal industry, gutting healthcare even further, and neutering regulations protecting citizen safety is 'progress' for you? These are concrete concerns that everyone is worried about, no matter what their political orientation is. I understand your reservations about Democrats, but is it too much to ask that you acknowledge that Trump has not done anything beneficial for his country thus far?

>>149204
I never advocated for Trump and was merely pointing out that people love to attribute economic successes and failures to the president regardless of whether it is deserved.

As for your points about "progress," it would be simpler if there were advocating solely for those things without all of the other baggage of the parties attached. I am all for civil rights, but don't think gun ownership should be infringed. I feel we need to expand into new forms of energy, but am a big proponent for nuclear power. How can I vote for "progress" when both parties advocate equal amounts of progress and regress relative to my values?

>>149204
You're just shuffling away and trying to pin everything on the camp you don't agree with

The Democrats have been sandbagging, blocking the Trump administration at every turn. They don't want anything he does to go through, and they would rather the country suffer then allow him to succeed on any of his campaign promises.

Soros and globalists are by far more dangerous and active that the "Koch brothers".

Russian meme is garbage - even if it wasn't it doesn't excuse the contents of the email leaks.

You're lost man. You're completely lost in your own sauce.

>>149211
>the republicans have been sandbagging...
What, honestly, do you think happened during obama's 8 years? This is the stage that the republican legislature has set. This is realpolitik now. And it came from your camp and their decisions.

>>149225
Obama got plenty through in 8 years. And guess what? All of it sucked.

>>149211
You lost /pol/ to Bernie bros.

>>149211
>The Democrats have been sandbagging, blocking the Trump administration at every turn. They don't want anything he does to go through, and they would rather the country suffer then allow him to succeed on any of his campaign promises.
Republicans have the presidency as well as a majority in both the house and the Senate and the SC and the governorships.
Trump hasn't even finished nominating the folks that are going to staff his administration, 4 months in.

>>149235
>republican legislative majority throughout 8 years
>Only laws with bipartisan approval can pass
>They all sucked
Hmmmmm....

>>149251
Globalists suck. Lots of Republicans are bought and paid for. Democrats and Republicans are the same, mostly.

I want Americanism. Globalism and crony politics can jump off a bridge

>>149257
I agree. But I disagree in solution. The only way you're going to have a fair market is if regulations are applied on a global scale.

Actual crony globalists -who profit off of multinational corporations, modern plantations, and sweat shops- do not want this sort of thing. They line their pockets on the differences in regulations between sovereign nation states. International regulation and watchdogs are the only thing that will make international trade ethical and fair to all countries so long as that trade exists.

And I want my fucking anime.

>>149211
>The Democrats have been sandbagging, blocking the Trump administration at every turn. They don't want anything he does to go through, and they would rather the country suffer then allow him to succeed on any of his campaign promises.
This is weak bait and should not have gotten as many serious responses as it has.

>>149261
Hardly bait when it's 100% true

>>149211
>The Democrats have been sandbagging, blocking the Trump administration at every turn.
That's why we need to kick em out and forbid anyone from any blue state from representation in congress. As far as I'm concerned, the liberal states are a foreign, hostile power that America is at war with and should be treated as such.

>>149264
This.

If we get Russia to help us take down the coasts, it should be an easy war. Won't be a repeat of the War of Northern Aggression, cause the conservatives have friends and controls the military this time.

>>149264
>>149267
You people are nuts. Do you honestly think that you can take on 60% of the country? Furthermore, how many of your 40% would actually be willing to go through with your craziness. You don't control the military either. They're conservative, but they serve America as a whole, not just rural interests. They aren't going to look at any efforts to overthrow the constitution kindly.

>>148823
>Trans bathroom req eating muh profits

Ok you had me going till that part. I don't think even liberal haven California requires an actual physical room be installed for Trans.

Stock growth without Production growth.

Civilized people call that "Bubbles"

GOP 90year olds are selling their "Emergency Gold" for American Stocks.

SELL SELL SELL SELL SELL SELL SELL

>>149270
They nixed it, that's why

>>149267
And to think that decades ago, just the first half of that sentence would get you branded as a Pinko by conservatives then, with all the stigma and scorn that label entailed. Now they can't wait to kiss Putin's feet along with you.

Foreign policy may change, but hypocrisy is forever. But of course, we were never at war with Eurasia!

>>149315
>HARRIS: Are you aware of any communications with any Trump officials or did you have any communications with any officials about Russia or Russian interests in the United States before January 20?

>SESSIONS: No. I may have had some conversations, and I think I did, with the general strategic concept of the possibility of whether or not Russia and the United States could get on a more harmonious relationship and move off the hostility. The soviet union did in fact collapse. It's really a tragic strategic event that we're not able to get along better than we are today.

>HARRIS: Before being sworn in as Attorney General, how did you typically communicate with then candidate or President-Elect Trump?

>SESSIONS: Would you repeat that?

>HARRIS: Before you were sworn in as Attorney General, how did you typically communicate with then candidate or President-Elect trump?

>SESSIONS: I did -- : I did not submit memorandum. I did not make formal presentations.

Source: http://www.politico.com/story/2017/06/13/full-text-jeff-session-trump-russia-testimony-239503

>>149264
>>149267
>its an autistic power fantasy episode

>>149205
A well informed candidate with successful policies and honest principles would get assassinated... or they would never get voted in in the first place because people do love their scapegoats.

>>149335
I've read the transcript myself. He clearly stated he didn't talk with the Russians about any political campaigns.

>Sessions: I have never met with or had any conversation with any Russians or any foreign officials concerning any type of interference with any campaign or election in the United States.

But that seems incredibly specific compared to what he said earlier in March during his recusal news conference:

>Sessions: [...] let me be clear. I never had meetings with Russian operatives or Russian intermediaries about the Trump campaign.

And even earlier in his confirmation hearings in January:

>Sessions: Senator Franken, I'm not aware of any of those activities. I have been called a surrogate at a time or two in that campaign and I didn't have- did not have communications with the Russians.

No communications at all, to no communications about Trump's campaign, to no communications about ANY campaign. Running out of wiggle room, Mr. Sessions?

Besides, his meetings with Kislyak after his appointment as a Trump advisor are already common knowledge. He still hasn't disclosed what he talked about then; how many other meetings hasn't he come clean about? How much has he spilled to the Russian government?

And finally, don't pretend that conservatives aren't admiring Russia's policies to an unhealthy extent. Russia has always borne enmity to the West, and Putin is determined to keep it that way. That's what I find most hypocritical about today's conservatives and the alt-right; they shun 'globalists' as puppets of foreign enemies, yet eagerly slurp down the Borscht if it means more guns and less gays.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/how-the-republican-right-found-allies-in-russia/2017/04/30/e2d83ff6-29d3-11e7-a616-d7c8a68c1a66_story.html?utm_term=.2b67d895e46a

>>149411
Using the Washington Post as a source is like using your hand to wipe your ass

>>149411
>Running out of wiggle room, Mr. Sessions?
He's been entirely consistent. You can try to twist around what he said all you want, you're blatantly trying to invent drama out of mid air.

>his meetings with Kislyak after his appointment as a Trump advisor are already common knowledge.
Evidence =/= anonymous sources

WashingtonPodesta plz.

>>149211
You mean the Democrats that don't control either the House or the Senate are sandbagging the Republicans who control literally all branches of the government? Are /pol/fags really this retarded?

>>149431
What is a "reliable" source then?

>>150336
There are none.

>>149087

>if anyone thinks the president can directly have a drastic impact on the economy they are foolish

Not in the short term, I agree. To be fair to the left we heard the line that we would economic misfortunes were because of Bush, and they're well in their capacity to use that line of reasoning now, even if it has little to do with Obama.

>>150412
He saved quite a few jobs from leaving

>>149431
>Using the Washington Post as a source is like using your hand to wipe your ass
[citation needed]
Just because a news agency doesn't support the political agenda of Trump's base (28% of registered voters) doesn't mean they're "fake".

The Trump administration has been offering more transparent lies to the public than any administration in living memory, and should be embarrassed to call anyone else a liar.

>>149204
This is what happens when a paid shill gets into an argument everyone, study closely

>>150480
I'm not a fan of the CIA or Podesta, so the Washington Post isn't a winner

>>149211
>You're completely lost in your own sauce.

Stop jacking the lingo if you ain't from bitch