White House says Mexico border wall might be funded by tax on imports

Which means: WE still pay for his goddam wall.

I really hope his meltdown occurs before he wrecks the economy.

We will see what happens in the future to the market.  I was simply pointing out that market went up — a lot — during Obama's administration, and I recall hearing from many critics (perhaps you, as well) that no credit was due Obama. I am not arguing that credit necessarily would be due, but it seems rather premature to give Trump credit for market increases, which, as you point out, can be due to many circumstances.  If the market has gone up because of speculation of what Trump may do and what that might mean for economic growth, then we will need to see if all that speculation proves true in the longer range.  That sound reasonable?      

Riiight. Just as only the peasants pay taxes - not really smart people.

Only traitors will pay! Real loyal patriots only buy American...

White House says Mexico border wall might be funded by tax on imports

Which means: WE still pay for his goddam wall.

I really hope his meltdown occurs before he wrecks the economy.

So what is your point in regards to Krugman's dire prediction ?  The Dow closed at 20,100 today.  Up about 1.3% since November 8, 2016 with no signs of faltering anytime soon.

Using the same standard for Obama, on November 3, 2008 the Dow closed at 9319.83 and fell to 7949.09 between then and his inauguration.  A decline of 1370 points or about 15%.  That is an accurate measure of confidence in the new Obama administration.  

We all know what really drove up the market during Obama's two terms, right ?  Interest rates of Zero and trillions of dollars printed by the Fed that had no where else to go but into the market as no one was loaning any of it out, right ?  Is it fair to consider the cratering of industrial commodities and no recovery during Obama's terms as a valid measure of industrial / manufacturing performance ?    

No one is printing money right now and the Fed raised interest rates and still the Markets went up since Trump's election.  Usually a rate hike causes the markets to fall.  Not this time.  Curious, eh ?

  But be patient, I'm sure some of that new wealth will trickle down on to you. 

 

By putting up two parts of the total instead of the one that would be enough for me to make a point ?   

I think that the primary reason that people opposed to Trump fail to figure out how to read Trump is that the context is ignored, for what ever reason.  The context that I and I suspect a majority of Trump supporters use is that it is one thing to have views, feelings, ideas and notions, many of which conflict with law and social norms, but acting on them is another.  I believe that this applies to everyone, universally.  So with that, while Trump has feelings on things, as POTUS, they will all be tempered by the rule of law and the laws on the books.  Note that in his speech at DHS yesterday, he stated that the only thing he was changing was enforcing existing laws, not putting in place anything new.

So to torture, yeah, I'm against it, yet also feel that it does work, sometimes.  Its the old ends justify the means thing.  One thing that set the USA apart from most of the rest of the world is not allowing torture, period.  Now we discuss it in terms of semantics.  But the law is the law, and Trump has made it clear he will do what the law says, regardless of how he feels.

But.  Its also good to know that Trump feels that torture does work.  I would like to think that if presented with the scenario of a ticking nuclear device found in the heart of NYC and the bomber in custody, that Trump would be willing to make that executive decision that only he could make, to do what ever it takes to get the disarm code out of the bomber, including torture if that is what is needed.  And the scenario I just used is not farfetched by any means.

That is how I read Trump.  And including the conflicting piece supports the context.  The context could not be supported without showing conflicting information.  That's how to read between the lines with Trump works or not.  

Oh and since Krugman wrote his piece cited below, $2 trillion in new wealth has been created in the rise of the stock markets.  That ain't chump change no matter how anyone looks at it.  In less than a couple of months.

Oh and since Krugman wrote his piece cited below, $2 trillion in new wealth has been created in the rise of the stock markets.  That ain't chump change no matter how anyone looks at it.  In less than a couple of months.