Any of you Trump supporters starting to get nervous?

[ticket2ride04]

1. Jobs and Growth.

2. I didn't say we recovered from the Great Depression in one year. I stated that we recovered from the 1920 crash in about a year to a year and a half.

The tax cuts have helped grow the economy, and we've actually collected more tax revenue with the cuts from everything I've read on the subject.

http://www.crfb.org/blogs/has-revenue-risen-2018

Nominal increases below the rate of inflation mean that the value of revenue collection has actually declined in real terms. By our estimate, total revenue over the time period in question has actually fallen by 1.3 percent after accounting for inflation in the last year. Measured relative to GDP – a sensible way to measure since a steady tax system would be expected to capture the same share of the economy year-after-year – we estimate revenue has fallen 3.8 percent. Finally, relative to the increases that had been expected from population growth, inflation, wage growth, structural elements of the tax code, and other factors, tax revenue is down by roughly 5.5 percent.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

Dershowitz agrees with me:

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/403072-did-president-trump-violate-campaign-finance-laws

A candidate is free to contribute to his or her own campaign. It also is not criminal for a candidate to pay hush money to women whose disclosures might endanger his campaign. So if candidate Trump paid hush money to his two accusers, there would be no violation of any campaign or other laws. To be sure, if he did so for the purpose of helping his campaign, as distinguished from helping his marriage, his campaign would have to disclose any such contribution, and failure to do so might be a violation of a campaign law, but the payments themselves would be entirely lawful.

Also from the article:

"Failure to report all campaign contributions is fairly common in political campaigns in the United States. Moreover, the offense is committed not by the candidate but, rather, by the campaign and is generally subject to a fine. Though it is wrong, it certainly is not the kind of high crime and misdemeanor that could serve as the basis for a constitutionally authorized impeachment and removal of a duly elected president."

Essentially this is a nothing-burger. Obama did the same thing as do most politicians.

 

[ticket2ride04]

Cohen and Pecker aren't really the most creditable witnesses. I'm not sure the John Edwards comparison is entirely accurate, but I understand why you are using it. His reputation was somewhat better and he didn't have a track record for that sort of thing. Trump has a track record for it. It just seems there's enough grey area to cut a favorable deal.

Neither is Trump the most credible character.

Again, Trump can just own this, pay a fine and move on.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

1. You clearly meant the Great Depression

2. The Depression of 1920 was nothing like the 2008 crash. Not even close.

Come on. My exact quote.

"The crash of 1920 was fixed in about a year, and by many measures that crash was worse than the Great Depression."

If I meant them to be the same thing, then why did I make a point to compare them? Sure, I called it a crash when it was really "just" a depression, but I've already admitted to that mistake. This one is on you.

 

[ticket2ride04]

Also from the article:

"Failure to report all campaign contributions is fairly common in political campaigns in the United States. Moreover, the offense is committed not by the candidate but, rather, by the campaign and is generally subject to a fine. Though it is wrong, it certainly is not the kind of high crime and misdemeanor that could serve as the basis for a constitutionally authorized impeachment and removal of a duly elected president."

Essentially this is a nothing-burger. Obama did the same thing as do most politicians.

You’re shifting your argument. Keep up. It’s still a campaign finance violation. That was my contention from the beginning.

Almost every campaign has violations. But they are usually mistakes. This was a concerted effort to quiet a pornstar and playboy playmate to keep quiet. John Edwards got in serious trouble for the same thing.

 

[dadika13]

"The crash of 1920 was fixed in about a year, and by many measures that crash was worse than the Great Depression."

This is horribly inaccurate.

 

[ticket2ride04]

Come on. My exact quote.

"The crash of 1920 was fixed in about a year, and by many measures that crash was worse than the Great Depression."

If I meant them to be the same thing, then why did I make a point to compare them? Sure, I called it a crash when it was really "just" a depression, but I've already admitted to that mistake. This one is on you.

I’ll own that, I jumped when you said 1920 and made the assumption you meant the Great Depression. I quit reading there.

Why would you compare 1920 to 2008?

 

[NoleSoup4U]

http://www.crfb.org/blogs/has-revenue-risen-2018

Nominal increases below the rate of inflation mean that the value of revenue collection has actually declined in real terms. By our estimate, total revenue over the time period in question has actually fallen by 1.3 percent after accounting for inflation in the last year. Measured relative to GDP – a sensible way to measure since a steady tax system would be expected to capture the same share of the economy year-after-year – we estimate revenue has fallen 3.8 percent. Finally, relative to the increases that had been expected from population growth, inflation, wage growth, structural elements of the tax code, and other factors, tax revenue is down by roughly 5.5 percent.

I'm not going to argue that inflation doesn't cut into growth, that wasn't my point. Inflation is about as constant of a variable as you can get in this equation. They try to keep it at around 2% a year. It manifests itself in other ways now, like unemployment.

 

[ticket2ride04]

This is horribly inaccurate.

Many people would tell you Jake Delhomme is a better QB than Tom Brady.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

I’ll own that, I jumped when you said 1920 and made the assumption you meant the Great Depression. I quit reading there.

Why would you compare 1920 to 2008?

Because, by the views of many economists, the depression of 1920 was worse than the Great Depression. The difference was how they were handled.

 

[ticket2ride04]

I'm not going to argue that inflation doesn't cut into growth, that wasn't my point. Inflation is about as constant of a variable as you can get in this equation. They try to keep it at around 2% a year. It manifests itself in other ways now, like unemployment.

Do you get tired of being wrong? You keep making false claims and when I expose them, you shift. So far in this thread I’ve done it with

- Dershowitz
- Great Depression/1920 recession/2008
- Tax revenues

You should quit posting with what you feel and actually try some fact.

 

[dadika13]

Because, by the views of many economists, the depression of 1920 was worse than the Great Depression. The difference was how they were handled.

Find me many economists who say this...I'll hang up and listen.

 

[ticket2ride04]

Because, by the views of many economists, the depression of 1920 was worse than the Great Depression. The difference was how they were handled.

Link to those economists?

 

[NoleSoup4U]

Many people would tell you Jake Delhomme is a better QB than Tom Brady.

This is horribly inaccurate.

https://fee.org/articles/the-depression-youve-never-heard-of-1920-1921/

 

[dadika13]

Many people would tell you Jake Delhomme is a better QB than Tom Brady.

Delhomme has only lost 1 Super Bowl. Brady's up to like 3 now.

So obviously...Delhomme > Brady.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

Do you get tired of being wrong? You keep making false claims and when I expose them, you shift. So far in this thread I’ve done it with

- Dershowitz
- Great Depression/1920 recession/2008
- Tax revenues

You should quit posting with what you feel and actually try some fact.

Facts? Like quoting Dershowitz? Like inflation being pretty much a constant when dealing with growth? I guess I'll try to do better.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

Delhomme has only lost 1 Super Bowl. Brady's up to like 3 now.

So obviously...Delhomme > Brady.

See, when you go to stuff like this, it just shows that you're losing the argument. I appreciate the concession, buddy!

 

[dadika13]

https://fee.org/articles/the-depression-youve-never-heard-of-1920-1921/

The only measure it was worse was the CPI. And this economist seems to crap on the Austrian economists theory that it was worse, whomever they happen to be.

 

[ticket2ride04]

https://fee.org/articles/the-depression-youve-never-heard-of-1920-1921/

No where does that say 1920 was worse than 1929.

Facts? Like quoting Dershowitz? Like inflation being pretty much a constant when dealing with growth? I guess I'll try to do better.

Please do better. It’s embarrising.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

https://mises.org/library/forgotten-depression-1920

Not surprisingly, many modern economists who have studied the depression of 1920–1921 have been unable to explain how the recovery could have been so swift and sweeping even though the federal government and the Federal Reserve refrained from employing any of the macroeconomic tools — public works spending, government deficits, and inflationary monetary policy — that conventional wisdom now recommends as the solution to economic slowdowns. The Keynesian economist Robert A. Gordon admitted that "government policy to moderate the depression and speed recovery was minimal. The Federal Reserve authorities were largely passive.… Despite the absence of a stimulative government policy, however, recovery was not long delayed."

 

[dadika13]

No where does that say 1920 was worse than 1929.



Please do better. It’s embarrising.

I'm actually beginning to think he's illiterate.

 

[ticket2ride04]

I'm actually beginning to think he's illiterate.

I wish he was trolling. But he’s not. The Dershowitz things was especially fun to debunk.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

The only measure it was worse was the CPI. And this economist seems to crap on the Austrian economists theory that it was worse, whomever they happen to be.

Where do you see that?

 

[ticket2ride04]

https://mises.org/library/forgotten-depression-1920

Not surprisingly, many modern economists who have studied the depression of 1920–1921 have been unable to explain how the recovery could have been so swift and sweeping even though the federal government and the Federal Reserve refrained from employing any of the macroeconomic tools — public works spending, government deficits, and inflationary monetary policy — that conventional wisdom now recommends as the solution to economic slowdowns. The Keynesian economist Robert A. Gordon admitted that "government policy to moderate the depression and speed recovery was minimal. The Federal Reserve authorities were largely passive.… Despite the absence of a stimulative government policy, however, recovery was not long delayed."

What school did you just graduate from?

 

[NoleSoup4U]

I wish he was trolling. But he’s not. The Dershowitz things was especially fun to debunk.

But you didn't debunk it. Dershowitz states flat-out that what they're trying to get Trump for is the same thing that almost every politician has done. Are we trying to hold Trump to a higher standard than every other president, and if so, why?

 

[NoleSoup4U]

What school did you just graduate from?

Why, are you running out of insults and now are going after an ad hominem argument? What does it matter where I graduated from?

How about this. I graduated from Trump University. Have at it, if it strokes your ego.

 

[ticket2ride04]

But you didn't debunk it. Dershowitz states flat-out that what they're trying to get Trump for is the same thing that almost every politician has done. Are we trying to hold Trump to a higher standard than every other president, and if so, why?

Listen closely. I didn’t say Trump could or should be indicted.

I said be committed a. campaign finance violation.

You said he did not and cited Dershowitz.

I showed you an article where Dershowitz writes he did.

How is this hard for you?

 

[NoleSoup4U]

I'm actually beginning to think he's illiterate.

You guys gotta up your game. I faced better insults on HROT when they didn't have a legit response.

 

[ticket2ride04]

Why, are you running out of insults and now are going after an ad hominem argument? What does it matter where I graduated from?

How about this. I graduated from Trump University. Have at it, if it strokes your ego.

I ask because you are quoting obscure economic analysis for a recession that doesn’t compare at all to 1929 or 2008. Rather than listen to others with opposing views, you double down. You’ve yet to show me ‘many economists’ who contend the recession of 1920 was worse than 1929.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

Listen closely. I didn’t say Trump could or should be indicted.

I said be committed a. campaign finance violation.

You said he did not and cited Dershowitz.

I showed you an article where Dershowitz writes he did.

How is this hard for you?

But Dershowitz calls it a "campaign violation", not a Trump violation.

 

[prlyles]

That would be incredibly stupid for a lawyer to do at this point.

You would have a point if all they had on him is what is known now, but who really believes it is?

 

[NoleSoup4U]

I ask because you are quoting obscure economic analysis for a recession that doesn’t compare at all to 1929 or 2008. Rather than listen to others with opposing views, you double down. You’ve yet to show me ‘many economists’ who contend the recession of 1920 was worse than 1929.

What? Do you want me to find a quote from a Keynesian telling us how badly their version of economics f'd up The Great Depression and The Great Recession?

I've posted two links now debating the issue and why I believe the Austrian way was better. You have yet to post anything on the subject.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

You would have a point if all they had on him is what is known now, but who really believes it is?

I don't know what to believe about the situation, because I'm not privy to all the facts. Neither are you though, so for you to speak in certainties about evidence that hasn't even been provided, doesn't make you look too impartial here. You guys are getting whipped up by the NYT and CNN like Breitbart and FOX whipped up the Republicans over Hillary Clinton.

 

[ticket2ride04]

But Dershowitz calls it a "campaign violation", not a Trump violation.

Lol. Are you serious man? This is my last attempt on this subject.

It was a campaign violation most likely directed by Trump (Cohen and Pecker testify as such) to cover up the fact that he had an affair with a porn star and playmate.

If he knew nothing about it, it’s still a campaign finance violation with small fines coming. But if it’s proved that he directed Cohen to pay her off and Pecker to buy up stories, there is a bigger issue.

At the end of the day, there remains a campaign finance violation.

Lastly, if Trump admits to it but pleads ignorance on the fact he didn’t know it was a violation, he will be safe. Unless he told Mueller something else.

 

[ticket2ride04]

What? Do you want me to find a quote from a Keynesian telling us how badly their version of economics f'd up The Great Depression and The Great Recession?

I've posted two links now debating the issue and why I believe the Austrian way was better. You have yet to post anything on the subject.

How the recovery was handled is much different than stating ‘the crash of 1920 was much worse than the Great Depression.’

Do you want to retract that assessment?

 

[prlyles]

I don't know what to believe about the situation, because I'm not privy to all the facts. Neither are you though, so for you to speak in certainties about evidence that hasn't even been provided, doesn't make you look too impartial here. You guys are getting whipped up by the NYT and CNN like Breitbart and FOX whipped up the Republicans over Hillary Clinton.

I'm sorry but I wasn't talking to you.

 

[tarheel0910]

Neither is Trump the most credible character.

Again, Trump can just own this, pay a fine and move on.

I never said he was. The government doesn't want to use witness that aren't credible unless absolutely necessary. Unless the feds have some more evidence, then I think Trump doesn't have to give in right now from a legal standpoint. He can let it play out for a little while longer. Especially with this stuff going on in the Flynn case. He would probably be better off from a PR perspective if he did what you said though. People would forget about this in a few months if he just paid the fine.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

Lol. Are you serious man? This is my last attempt on this subject.

It was a campaign violation most likely directed by Trump (Cohen and Pecker testify as such) to cover up the fact that he had an affair with a porn star and playmate.

If he knew nothing about it, it’s still a campaign finance violation with small fines coming. But if it’s proved that he directed Cohen to pay her off and Pecker to buy up stories, there is a bigger issue.

At the end of the day, there remains a campaign finance violation.

Lastly, if Trump admits to it but pleads ignorance on the fact he didn’t know it was a violation, he will be safe. Unless he told Mueller something else.

Most likely isn't the same as definitely. As for Cohen and Pecker, I've already posted on here a few times about Muellers earlier failure by trying the same tactic. Mueller isn't good at what he does. He never has been, and he never will be. He's the janitor of the political world. He just happens to be best friends with the manager.

 

[NoleSoup4U]

I'm sorry but I wasn't talking to you.

It doesn't make my comments any less true.

 

[tarheel0910]

You would have a point if all they had on him is what is known now, but who really believes it is?

So he should resign just in case something happens in the future? That's a horrible idea and no lawyer worth his salt would recommended that. No prosecutor would even offer that either.