Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : ajtj's Post-Lobotomy Market Charts and Thoughts -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: robert b furman who wrote (58032)	4/26/2022 11:50:44 PM
From: ajtj99	4 Recommendations Recommended By kimberley roto Thomas M. towerdog Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 98728

Robert, I will respectfully disagree with you as to the power of presidents to influence the economy. The Fed is the prime influencer of the economy, with the President only involved in that they may pick the leader of the Fed. An example of this would be Arthur Burns. He was a Nixon flunkie who did what Nixon wanted (inflate away the deficit). You may think Reagan was the architect of the 80's boom, but it was Paul Volker (a Carter appointee) who slayed the dragon with his massive interest rate hikes that led to 2-recessions and low poll numbers for Reagan in 1982. If we had a Fed Funds rate of 5% during Trump's reign, I doubt the economy would have been the same. Biden really has nothing to do with the economy, especially with the death of the Behemoth Bill. There is the infrastructure package, but that was bi-partisan, and Trump tried to pass a version of it during his term. Presidents can provide confidence in things, and Republicans are better at this the past 50-year than their opponents. However, the business cycle tends to follow its own path regardless of who is in the big chair. I wouldn't put the 2008 recession on GWB anymore than I'd put the 2012 PIIGS crisis on Obama. The seeds for the 2008 recession were planted by The Committee to Save the World in 1999, with Greenspan and Larry Summers leading the way. However, the bailouts and Fed backstopping started with the Continental Illinois rescue back in, what, 1984? We've been doing the same since then for every crisis, from the Latin American crisis in 1994, to the Asian Crisis in the late 90's, to Y2K, to 9-11, to the housing bubble and the GFC, and so on.

To: robert b furman who wrote (58032)	4/27/2022 11:32:54 PM
From: Sun Tzu	7 Recommendations Recommended By ajtj99 bustersmith edward miller John Koligman kimberley and 2 more members Respond to of 98728

Bob, there are many perspectives on what the right policy is and I am not going to discuss the politics of Trump. But I think we can agree that a "leader" who cannot lead is nothing. Trump's cabinet was a revolving door. The stories that came out of Trump's White House were all very consistent on how toxic that environment was. Any president who cannot manage and win the loyalty of his cabinet members is not fit for the office. You can love him or hate him, but you cannot deny how ineffective and divisive he was. This was even more shocking given the grip he had on the party and that GOP controlled all 3 branches of the government. That is not good for the country. I get it that the country is polarized and that no matter who is in the office half the country hates him. But every other president at least tried to be the president of everyone and tone down the divisiveness. Trump is the only one who exploited it and did not even pay lip service to being the president of a united group of states. He was just the president of those who voted for him. And I am saying this as someone who actually cheered his election as a victory for American democracy (you can see my SI post on that the morning after he was elected) and also as someone who thought some of Trump's solutions were brilliant. And I very much appreciated that he was not trigger happy and reduced the US engagement in forever wars. So I am not in the camp who believes he was the devil's spawn. As to the economy (and a lot of other things), there are huge limits to what a president can do. As AJ pointed out, the Fed has more power over the economy than the president. And furthermore the environment and conditions that you inherit constrains the president a lot more than most people pay attention to. This includes the commitments made by the previous admins and the global landscape. Biden is pursuing a very dangerous foreign policy road. He thinks that the US will always be the winner. But there is always a chance that you lose and the stakes he has raised are too high.