Trump is so bad on economics it is almost impossible to overstate

[BigAndJuicy]

I'm going to be applying for a doctorate program in economics in the coming year, so I know more about economics then most. I am neither conservative nor liberal. I saw a lot of Trump supporters on misc so I thought I'd send his economic policies at least a reality check and try to turn people with open minds away from him. I'll use polls of economists (mostly from the IGM forum, a great organization that attempts to present where economists all across the political spectrum stand on most issues) and maybe some papers to show just how far against the facts and consensus Trump is. These are not my "opinions". I'm presenting the consensus of experts through polls of them and representative literature I'll just be addressing a few of his positions

First, for all his trade policies, which are completely backwards.

I think we all know Trump's trade positions. He sees trade deficits as draining wealth out of the country, and taking American jobs. He believes America can become prosperous again by becoming a net exporter and putting up tariffs if necessary. He believes countries such as China and Japan are using unfair currency manipulation tactics that harm the average American. He is against NAFTA, TPP, etc.

Here are 6 polls of economists, some with two questions each, that address the above statements. The consensus is strong, and it is not in favor of Trump.

economists on trade:

http://www.igmchicago.org/igm-econom...dfr9yjnDcLh17m

http://www.igmchicago.org/igm-econom...68906VNWqVmiGN

http://www.igmchicago.org/igm-econom...3jxYtWKoF4vSKx

http://www.igmchicago.org/igm-econom...03w6LBGnkOfDuI

http://www.igmchicago.org/igm-econom...CrHQToXMqPfLzD

http://www.igmchicago.org/igm-econom...5byqjBle85jqy9


A brief explanation of why Donald Trump has bad ideas when it comes to trade: A trade deficit is not a bad thing. It is the product of a strong dollar and a country being wealthy. The country is so wealthy it can afford to buy other countries' produce. In the long run, trade does not decrease jobs. Jobs expand in export industries and domestic industries by the amount initially lost by outsourcing. The literature collectively suggests that there is negligible long run effects on employment and wages by opening borders. In the long-long run, effects are weak-positive. This has been confirmed over and over empirically. Here is a literature review in retrospect on the employment effects of NAFTA, for example: http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/34486.pdf

But the primary benefit of international trade is lower prices for consumers. There is a reason why we buy foreign goods. They are cheaper. All those cheap things at WalMart you can buy are thanks to international trade. Without it, you would see the prices of these goods increase significantly, and you would see your real incomes drop. Raising our trade surplus (or reducing our trade deficit) would not make people better off, because you would basically be reducing their purchasing power so they could not buy foreign goods. See page 13 of this link: https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/def...bargoed_v2.pdf - the poor and middle class benefit from trade the most, because they purchase the most goods from foreign countries. The whitehouse summary is more layman-friendly with graphs.


Economics of immigration

You can see a laughably overwhelming consensus of what economists think of the economics of Trump's deportation plan here: http://www.npr.org/sections/money/20...als-mostly-bad as well as some other policies by both Trump and other candidates.

I'll also tie in H1B's/skilled and unskilled immigrants in. Do they take our jobs and make the average person worse off?

Economists unanimously agree that high skilled workers (such as those that come in on H1B's) are beneficial to the US economy, and a significant majority think even low skilled workers are beneficial for the average American.

http://www.igmchicago.org/igm-econom...JtSLKwzqNSfrAF

http://www.igmchicago.org/igm-econom...vuNnqkBeAMAfHv

About immigrants draining our tax dollars through social services and such, that is not really a valid concern either.


The amount of jobs isn't fixed. It's not zero-sum. If one person gains a job it doesn't mean another loses one. When someone immigrates here, they demand food, housing, services, entertainment, etc. This creates one net job in net.

Here is an analysis by the congressional budget office on the tax revenues and costs associated with both legal and illegal immigration. Right in the intro we see a nice summary of the conclusions of studies on the subject in recent years, which have concluded that both legal AND illegal immigration contribute more in taxes than they receive terms of government spending:

https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/fi...mmigration.pdf

Over the past two decades, most efforts to estimate the
fiscal impact of immigration in the United States have
concluded that, in aggregate and over the long term, tax
revenues of all types generated by immigrants—both
legal and unauthorized—exceed the cost of the services
they use.1, 2 Generally, such estimates include revenues
and spending at the federal, state, and local levels.

Overall, the studies I have seen have had weak evidence or evidence concluding the opposite (they contribute) when it comes to concluding that immigrants, both legal and illegal, somehow burden the nation as a whole when it comes to receiving government transfers.

It is not common among economists to believe that immigrants take jobs.

Here is a top economist (note Mankiw is conservative - chair of the harvard econ department) backing up the opinion of another top economist on the idea that there is no evidence that immigrants cause negative effects over the long term.

http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/2006/...migration.html


Trump's tax plan

Trump's tax plan is completely unrealistic. Here is the tax foundation analysis:

http://taxfoundation.org/article/det...ump-s-tax-plan

Even after accounting for growth (economists know this talking point is bull****, that cutting taxes will raise growth and tax cuts will be revenue neutral: http://www.igmchicago.org/igm-econom...irlrss5UC27YXi), we would lose 10 trillion in revenue over the course of a decade. This means that the deficit would increase by over 1 trillion per year an absolutely insane amount, unlike anything seen since the very worst of the recession. But then we were in a recession, we would expect to be running low tax revenues because national income is low. The debt would skyrocket under Trump's tax plan, god forbid there were to be another recession, we could run over 2 trillion annual deficits with his tax plan.

Now that we are approaching full employment and a fully functioning economy, now is the time to pay down our debt, rather then cut taxes even further, raising the deficit only to have it explode whenever the next recession hits.

This is ironic, because on Trump's on the issues page it says he once said: If debt reaches $24T, that's the point of no return.

Ignoring the fact that no economist believes that, and he pulled the number straight out his ass, We would hit that point probably within three years if he were elected and somehow managed to get his ridiculous tax plan passed.

Note, debt/gdp is the actual important metric, not absolute debt.

Absolutely stupid statements on unemployment

"I've seen numbers of 24 percent -- I actually saw a number of 42 percent unemployment. Forty-two percent." He continued, "5.3 percent unemployment -- that is the biggest joke there is in this country

- Donald Trump.

Forty-two percent is the amount of the population not in the labor force. Donald Trump literally counted all the retired elderly people and babies in America and counted them as unemployed people.

Economists look at many measures of unemployment, which historically move together proportionally:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm

There has been no divergence. U3 is the most useful one that economists use. We could use any measure, U3, U4, U6, whatever. Economists like to use U3

"The natural rate", which I will not go into detail as to what it is here, is seen here: https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/NROU. If we were to use U6 for example, the natural rate for that one would be something around 9% or something like that if I remember correctly. Again, it doesn't matter what measure we use. There is no conspiracy by economists in academia to fudge the unemployment numbers for some unknown reason

Actual rate of U3 right now is 4.9, as you saw. We are at full employment right now, the natural rate. Any further decreases in unemployment are not really socially desirable as going beyond the natural rate leads to overutilization of resources and inflation


But...but he's a businessman. He has to know economics. If he can make himself rich he can make the country rich!

For this I'll reference the classic piece by Nobel Prize winning macroeconomist Paul Krugman:

https://hbr.org/1996/01/a-country-is-not-a-company

If he went into detail on more things I'm sure they would be just as bad, like I don't know what he thinks about the Fed, what we should do during recessions, etc.

[lalaland86]

Yet you know less about grammar than a fifth grader.

[pumpgun51]

nobody cares, he is getting rid of the brown people























DRUMPF 2016

[latverian41]

And who would get your nod for the greatest economist of the past 100 years?

[jacklambert58]

Dude, he's building a wall - what more do you need.

[NYPat]

Yet you know less about grammar than a fifth grader.

Red argues grammar.

[TexasMajor]

I'm going to be applying for a doctorate program in economics in the coming year, so I know more about economics then most.

Literally stopped reading first sentence.

>Age: 21

>brainwashed by his liberal university.

>Has not contributed anything to society thus far

>Presumably pays little to no taxes

>Fck your opinion

[BigAndJuicy]

And who would get your nod for the greatest economist of the past 100 years?

I'll give you a list in no particular order:

Solow
Lucas
Keynes
Friedman
Paul Samuelson
Krugman

Literally stopped reading first sentence.

>Age: 21

>brainwashed by his liberal university.

>Has not contributed anything to society thus far

>Presumably pays little to no taxes

>Fck your opinion

It's not my opinion though. I linked like 10 different polls of some of the top economists in the world, professors from Harvard, MIT, Stanford, Berkeley, etc.

It's not "opinions" it's empirics

[TacticalTaco]

Age: 21

Real work experience: 0

Real life experience: 0

Credentials: About to begin the beginning of the end of his education.


OK OP

[pumpgun51]

I'll give you a list in no particular order:

Solow
Lucas
Keynes
Friedman
Paul Samuelson
Krugman



It's not my opinion though. I linked like 10 different polls of some of the top economists in the world, professors from Harvard, MIT, Stanford, Berkeley, etc.

It's not "opinions" it's empirics

BROWN people gone, shiny 150 feet high wall, first lady we want to bang


what don't you get you satanic libtard ?

[latverian41]

I'll give you a list in no particular order:

Solow
Lucas
Keynes
Friedman
Paul Samuelson

Want to impress your professor?
Stand out?

Write a paper on economist lochlan curry.

Economist to FDR. GOT us out of the great depression. Discovered to be a KGB spy by the FBI Belonging to the silver master spy ring.

Only FDR loved him so much he sent curry to China before the FBI could arrest him and he started the flying tiger's which was the precurcoer to air America.

Yes the cia drug trafficking airlines.

This is one of the most important.men in history no one has ever heard of.

[NYPat]

Literally stopped reading first sentence.

>Age: 21

>brainwashed by his liberal university.

>Has not contributed anything to society thus far

>Presumably pays little to no taxes

>Fck your opinion

Still daf

[lalaland86]

Red argues grammar.

Then vs. than. It is a pretty simple concept, especially for a doctoral applicant.

Only red because manlet mods negged me into oblivion.

I am sorry but if you are under 5'8" you should not be able to call yourself a man.

[TexasMajor]

Still daf

You poor thing.


You've been traumatized ever since you were ousted from the sports misc. Youre not respected anywhere. LMFAO

[JD805]

The only part that I disagree in the OP is that illegals or legal immigrants don't harm Americans. I'm not saying they do but the way I see it there are some jobs like agriculture that Americans aren't willing to do but construction/ meat packaging/etc are jobs that illegals may end up taking away from Americans. Highly skilled immigrants also tend to replace American workers.

[spurz89]

Literally stopped reading first sentence.

>Age: 21

>brainwashed by his liberal university.

>Has not contributed anything to society thus far

>Presumably pays little to no taxes

>Fck your opinion

I find the liberal university part the most interesting in this post.
Can you give me a list of conservative universities that people should be going to so they have a better grasp on economics?

[tnel00]

You were doing well till you hit his tax plan OP.

You cannot look at a candidates tax plan in a vacuum. It must be viewed in addition to his spending plan (or plan to cut spending) if you're going to view it from an economic perspective.

Otherwise I agree completely with your points made about Trump and his ignorance for economics.

[wamplex]

Age: 21

Real work experience: 0

Real life experience: 0

Credentials: About to begin the beginning of the end of his education.


OK OP

Exactly. Take my rapes.


Read what Kudlow said about his plan:

Economist, radio host, and CNBC senior contributor Larry Kudlow appeared on Breitbart News Daily Friday morning to discuss economic issues in the presidential race, including his support for Donald Trump’s economic platform, with some disagreement about the best way to handle unfair Chinese trade practices.

Breitbart News executive chairman and host Stephen K. Bannon asked Kudlow to comment on the rise of “populist, nationalist” economics, as personified by Trump and his supporter Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-AL)80%
, and the challenge this movement presents to free-trade orthodoxy, which Bannon described as a “fetish” in certain intellectual quarters..

“Well, I may be part of that fetish,” Kudlow said with a chuckle. “Free-market capitalism is the best path to prosperity.”

Kudlow said he found Trump’s platform very agreeable to free-market growth: “He has a very good corporate tax-cut plan, across the board, for large companies and small companies. He’s got a 15 percent rate — we’re about 35 to 40 percent now.”

“So let’s say that became law,” Kudlow continued. “You’d see a movement, a tremendous movement, of capital and labor back to the United States, that’s in China and overseas, because we’d have a more hospitable business tax environment. You include immediate deductions for new business investment, and you include repatriation, which is all in Trump’s plan, and you’ve got yourself a powerful incentive to move back to the USA.”

Kudlow thought such “incentive economics” were better tools than the tariffs Trump has proposed for punishing businesses that move overseas, preferring carrots to sticks. However, he agreed that stern measures were needed to deal with China, which Bannon described as a “mercantilist society” — the government actively harming foreign competition to give native industries an edge.

Kudlow described China as “our enemy, not our friend,” citing their aggression in the South China Sea, and their willingness to stand behind “some of the worst terrorist dictatorships in the world,” including Iran. He stressed the importance of responding to China’s “counterfeiting of goods, stealing of our intellectual property rights, and cyber-hacking our systems here, both government and industry.”

Having said that, Kudlow added he was “not a guy who likes tariffs,” which he described as taxes that would “hurt the American consumer.” He preferred using international bodies such as the World Trade Organization to deal with unfair practices by China and others… provided America fields a president who can negotiate tough trade agreements and not “give up all the time, which unfortunately has been the case.”

He returned to his theme of incentive economics as the best way to restore American manufacturing and reverse capital flight.

“If you lower marginal tax rates on business, both large and small… if you roll back regulations, for example, let’s go to right-to-work laws, which would make us much more hospitable to investment… those are the things that would help America, and that’s what we should focus on,” he advised.

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presid...or-back-to-us/

People keep saying that Trump is not a politician, economist, etc etc....take a look around, we have politicians running countries, full with economists(including those educated at top universities) on their staff, yet we cant get out of economic crisis....as soon as we barely get out of one crisis, the next one is already here. Where would US be if it was not for FED? Where would Europe be if it was not for Draghi printing money and negative rates? It is not even about business cycle anymore, just incompetence.

All these smartasses had years to put their plans to work, yet they did nothing, as soon as Trump comes with something "new", then all of these armchair economists come out.

[gluon]

Lol at economists, trying to define something which is essentially unpredictable. They are in the same pseudoscience boat as psychologists.

[DeshaunWatson]

Lol at economists, trying to define something which is essentially unpredictable. They are in the same pseudoscience boat as psychologists.

You're right you know

[sigsauerbrah]

I'll give you a list in no particular order:

Solow
Lucas
Keynes
Friedman
Paul Samuelson
Krugman

All you did was list off famous economists. Which one gets your nod?

[lalaland86]

Lol at economists, trying to define something which is essentially unpredictable. They are in the same pseudoscience boat as psychologists.

lol at 21 year old "economists" who do not even have a bachelors degree thinking they know more than(or then as OP like to use) a billionaire. OP is a fuarking joke. A disgrace to his family and his people.

[lalaland86]

I'll give you a list in no particular order:

Solow
Lucas
Keynes
Friedman
Paul Samuelson
Krugman

How many of these men lack a college degree as yourself?

Only got into college because you wrote an essay about living with cancer and they pity you.

Balding at 21. god hates you.

[tnel00]

lol at 21 year old "economists" who do not even have a bachelors degree thinking they know more than(or then as OP like to use) a billionaire. OP is a fuarking joke. A disgrace to his family and his people.

Becoming a billionaire in real estate does not make someone an expert on fiscal or economic policy.

[lalaland86]

Becoming a billionaire in real estate does not make someone an expert on fiscal or economic policy.

This is why everyone in real estate becomes a billionaire right? Is your IQ even above 83? The average ISIS members IQ.

watch this vid you narcissistic cuck

[JD805]

Exactly. Take my rapes.


Read what Kudlow said about his plan:



http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presid...or-back-to-us/

People keep saying that Trump is not a politician, economist, etc etc....take a look around, we have politicians running countries, full with economists(including those educated at top universities) on their staff, yet we cant get out of economic crisis....as soon as we barely get out of one crisis, the next one is already here. Where would US be if it was not for FED? Where would Europe be if it was not for Draghi printing money and negative rates? It is not even about business cycle anymore, just incompetence.

All these smartasses had years to put their plans to work, yet they did nothing, as soon as Trump comes with something "new", then all of these armchair economists come out.

Trump also encouraged people to invest in the housing market bubble right before it crashed.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archive...id-in-2007.php

http://reason.com/archives/2015/08/2...rump-recession

[dakensta]

Cliffs of thrad:
ur book lernin' ain't shyt until u pay taxes and do work a job for some many years.
opinions ain't real much less you gots lotsamoney or be old.

[lalaland86]

Trump also encouraged people to invest in the housing market bubble right before it crashed.

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archive...id-in-2007.php

http://reason.com/archives/2015/08/2...rump-recession

Oh look captain hindsight back again. Let me guess, you knew the market was going to crash in 2008-2009?

How about in 2003 when everybody thought the market was about to crash as well, but it kept going up for another 5 years. Easy to judge in hindsight from an armchair.

[JD805]

Oh look captain hindsight back again. Let me guess, you knew the market was going to crash in 2008-2009?

How about in 2003 when everybody thought the market was about to crash as well, but it kept going up for another 5 years. Easy to judge in hindsight from an armchair.

A lot of people saw it coming. You would expect that a "genius" would see it coming. People who could barely afford to pay for one home started getting all these loans to buy homes they couldn't afford...hmmm

[lalaland86]

A lot of people saw it coming. You would expect that a "genius" would see it coming. People who could barely afford to pat for one home started getting all these loans to buy homes they couldn't afford...hmmm

pat for a home?

I know many millionaire real estate investors, and they thought the market was going to crash in 2003 for sure. They were so sure of this, but somehow it just kept going up. They were saying it in 2003, saying it in 2004, saying it 2005, saying it in 2006, yet people kept refinancing, seeing their equity go up, and becoming richer in this market that was about to crash.

To say that someone should have known that the predictions of a crash in 2004 were stupid, but in 2008, everybody should have known it would crash just shows how little experience you have dealing in real estate and dealing with real estate investors.


You are basically saying the rain dance worked because they didn't stop dancing until it rained.