d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate >
Poll > Trump 2016 > Trump Vs Clinton
Prev1199619971998199920003169Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
  Guests cannot view or vote in polls. Please register or login.
Member
Posts: 104,580
Joined: Apr 25 2006
Gold: 10,485.00
Jun 11 2018 11:38pm
Quote (Thor123422 @ Jun 12 2018 01:36am)
I know it's hard to comprehend but the effects of a presidency don't end the second he's out of office.

Trump has done basically nothing but continue the track set by Obama for the economy.

Unless you want to cede that the president has little effect on the economy, in which case we can talk about that.




You will come up with ANY reason not to give trump credit. You're amusing, at least.
Member
Posts: 46,695
Joined: Jan 20 2010
Gold: 22,164.69
Jun 11 2018 11:58pm
Quote (Ghot @ Jun 11 2018 11:38pm)
You will come up with ANY reason not to give trump credit. You're amusing, at least.


Dude of course Trump is just stealing credit for Obamas work. Just today hes doing nothing but following the footsteps of Obama and retracing Obama's nimble diplomacy on north korea in typical blundering Trump fashion. Everything you see at this north korea summit? Obama's work.

Thanks Obama
Member
Posts: 104,580
Joined: Apr 25 2006
Gold: 10,485.00
Jun 12 2018 12:00am
Quote (Goomshill @ Jun 12 2018 01:58am)
Dude of course Trump is just stealing credit for Obamas work. Just today hes doing nothing but following the footsteps of Obama and retracing Obama's nimble diplomacy on north korea in typical blundering Trump fashion. Everything you see at this north korea summit? Obama's work.

Thanks Obama




:D
Member
Posts: 104,580
Joined: Apr 25 2006
Gold: 10,485.00
Jun 12 2018 02:10am
Quote (EndlessSky @ Jun 11 2018 10:55pm)




Trump economic adviser Kudlow in 'good' condition after heart attack

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-kudlow/trump-economic-adviser-kudlow-in-good-condition-after-heart-attack-idUSKBN1J802D

Quote
“Larry is currently in good condition ... and his doctors expect he will make a full and speedy recovery,” she said.




Member
Posts: 46,695
Joined: Jan 20 2010
Gold: 22,164.69
Jun 12 2018 03:22am
https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/06/bill-de-blasio-education-new-york-best-schools-destroyed/

Quote
De Blasio’s Plan to Destroy New York’s Best Schools
These are some of the last bastions of absolute meritocracy left in America.

Let’s take some of the best public high schools in the United States and tweak their admissions policies, argues New York City mayor Bill de Blasio. Instead of admitting students solely by merit, de Blasio says, they should accept the top 7 percent of students from every middle school in New York City.

Most of these middle schools are the educational equivalent of Superfund sites. De Blasio’s proposal makes about as much sense as Google announcing that henceforth 5 percent of its engineers will be graduates of Stanford, 5 percent of Harvard, 5 percent of Muleshoe State Technical College, 5 percent of Vidal Sassoon’s Hairdressing Academy, and 5 percent of Arkham Asylum for the Criminally Insane. It’s as if the Golden State Warriors announced that in the interest of sportsological diversity, they will no longer ruthlessly screen for gifted basketball players but instead will set aside spots for one golfer and one bowler on next year’s starting five.

Stuyvesant High School, the Bronx High School of Science, Brooklyn Tech, and five other specialized schools have a rich history of service as oases from the miserable norms that define most precincts of the New York City Department of Education. Stuyvesant’s graduates include four Nobel laureates, Eric Holder, David Axelrod, and Tim Robbins. Bronx Science, as it is known, boasts eight Nobel winners, more than any high school in the country, and six Pulitzer Prize winners.

If these schools were filling their classrooms with the Chads and Buffys of the entitled Park Avenue trust-fund aristocracy, they would have been condemned and reorganized long ago. But they’re not, and everyone knows it. The students who attend them are mostly eager and driven immigrants or the products of immigrant families, mainly Asian ones. Some 73 percent of current Stuyvesant students are Asian Americans, and 45 percent are from low-income families. Far from being born with silver spoons in their mouths, they were lucky if they got a plastic spork. They are, in short, a microcosm of the great American story of desperate or simply starry-eyed travelers who came to these shores and rejoiced in the freedom they discovered — the freedom to achieve, even to excel. Their example is a rejoinder to the grim determinists of the education establishment, such as the Baghdad Bob of failing schools, Diane Ravitch, whose argument against public-school reform is essentially that schools can’t cure poverty, and literal poverty naturally leads to its intellectual equivalent.

The sole criterion for these schools is ability. They are some of the last bastions of absolute meritocracy left in America. You don’t get in because your parents bought the school a science lab. You don’t get in because you told the saddest sob story. You don’t get in because the school feels it needs a certain number of people of your skin color. You get in by acing the insanely challenging Specialized High Schools Admission Test (SHSAT). That’s it. The test requires commitment, concentration, preparation. It requires high intelligence and maybe even higher effort. Very few Latinos and blacks are admitted to these schools, but anyone who hungers for a place at Stuyvesant is free to work as hard for it as all of these immigrant families do. They are free to prove that they’re exceptional.

Here’s the best that proponents of de Blasio’s plan can do: “The worst-kept secret in New York parenting is that the entry process for our elite high schools is being gamed every single day by those willing to buy shortcuts to success,” writes liberal columnist Errol Louis in the Daily News. “I once casually asked a friend (Asian-American) what his son was doing for the summer, and was startled to learn the boy spent every summer vacation — and every weekend — doing test prep. This went on for the better part of a decade, and was all intended to culminate with a high SHSAT score and entry to Stuyvesant (which is indeed what happened).” How dare anyone “game the system” by working hard? Writ large, that could lead to — gulp! — harder-working people being more successful at life in general. De Blasio’s schools chancellor Richard Carranza also implied that the fix is in for Asians: “I just don’t buy into the narrative that any one ethnic group owns admission to these schools,” he said.

It’s absurd to argue that bringing in 7-percenters from, say, the extravagantly mislabeled Renaissance School of the Arts in East Harlem, where only 17 percent of students even managed to pass the basic state math exam, is not going to diminish the quality of the education at these high-performance schools. It’s also absurd to argue that throwing so-so students in with budding geniuses is going to make the mediocrities brilliant. If intelligence rubbed off on people, we’d just send a few astrophysicists to stroll through blighted neighborhoods shaking hands and kissing babies.

De Blasio’s plan is probably doomed because, thanks to similar impulses expressed by Mayor John Lindsay in 1971, the state of New York exercises control over admissions policies of the eight elite city schools (though de Blasio has recently hinted that he thinks he might have the legal authority to change the policies for five of them). The relatively conservative state senate would presumably block any effort to dilute admissions standards, and even the lower house, the state assembly, which is firmly in the grip of liberal Democrats, has been slow-walking de Blasio’s plan and won’t vote on it before the summer recess. Some ideas are too nutty even for liberal Democrats in one of the most liberal states.

But it’s an iron law of the Democratic party that what is widely agreed to be bonkers today will tomorrow seem like an attractively daring fight for social justice.


shit like this, is why I ain't looking back
Member
Posts: 52,329
Joined: May 26 2005
Gold: 4,404.67
Jun 12 2018 04:56am
even with we ignore all the regulation cuts, the tax cuts and all the other pro-business stuff trump has done, it's still quite ridiculous to give obama's policies credit for the relatively good economy he passed on to trump. let's not forget that obama ballooned the debt by $10 trillion during his 8 years in office, and no, this is not exclusively due to the financial crisis (which he inherited from bush).

if we look at the following chart:

we can clearly see that obama only marginally slowed down the pace of the debt from 2012 to 2016, i.e. when the immediate financial crisis was long over, as compared to the time of crisis from 2008-2011.

so while it's true that trump inherited a healthy economy from obama, obama only achieved this by continuously making tons of debts.
Member
Posts: 33,654
Joined: Oct 9 2008
Gold: 2,603.52
Jun 12 2018 05:11am
Quote (Thor123422 @ Jun 12 2018 01:36am)
I know it's hard to comprehend but the effects of a presidency don't end the second he's out of office.

Trump has done basically nothing but continue the track set by Obama for the economy.

Unless you want to cede that the president has little effect on the economy, in which case we can talk about that.


Stock market is bAsed on future expectations. President’s only job is to leave the economy alone so it can grow. Obama stifled future investments with the threat of regulation from places like the cfpb.
Member
Posts: 64,732
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 260.11
Jun 12 2018 05:11am
Quote (Black XistenZ @ Jun 12 2018 04:56am)
even with we ignore all the regulation cuts, the tax cuts and all the other pro-business stuff trump has done, it's still quite ridiculous to give obama's policies credit for the relatively good economy he passed on to trump. let's not forget that obama ballooned the debt by $10 trillion during his 8 years in office, and no, this is not exclusively due to the financial crisis (which he inherited from bush).
if we look at the following chart:
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/09/US_national_debt.png
we can clearly see that obama only marginally slowed down the pace of the debt from 2012 to 2016, i.e. when the immediate financial crisis was long over, as compared to the time of crisis from 2008-2011.
so while it's true that trump inherited a healthy economy from obama, obama only achieved this by continuously making tons of debts.


Has Trump slowed the increase in the debt?

Nope.

The economy is continuing the same trends, both the positive and negative ones, that started under Obama. Obama definitely left us with some terrible structural problems in our economy that are going to explode in our faces eventually, but the thing is Trump isn't doing anything to change those problems. He's riding the short-term positive effects they bring the same as Obama did.
Member
Posts: 52,329
Joined: May 26 2005
Gold: 4,404.67
Jun 12 2018 05:23am
Quote (Thor123422 @ 12 Jun 2018 13:11)
Has Trump slowed the increase in the debt?

Nope.

The economy is continuing the same trends, both the positive and negative ones, that started under Obama. Obama definitely left us with some terrible structural problems in our economy that are going to explode in our faces eventually, but the thing is Trump isn't doing anything to change those problems. He's riding the short-term positive effects they bring the same as Obama did.


I didnt claim that Trump slowed the debt-making.

My opinion is actually quite simple: Trump did contribute to the strong current economy with his pro-business, anti-regulation policies, so he derserves some credit. But since he inherited a relatively strong economy from Obama, he doesnt deserve full credit either.

All I was saying in my previous post is that irrespective from this assessment of Trump's impact on the economy, Obama himself does NOT deserve too much credit for the "obama economy" which he passed on to Trump, since this "obama economy" was largely debt-driven.

This post was edited by Black XistenZ on Jun 12 2018 05:24am
Member
Posts: 64,732
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 260.11
Jun 12 2018 05:29am
Quote (Black XistenZ @ Jun 12 2018 05:23am)
I didnt claim that Trump slowed the debt-making.

My opinion is actually quite simple: Trump did contribute to the strong current economy with his pro-business, anti-regulation policies, so he derserves some credit. But since he inherited a relatively strong economy from Obama, he doesnt deserve full credit either.

All I was saying in my previous post is that irrespective from this assessment of Trump's impact on the economy, Obama himself does NOT deserve too much credit for the "obama economy" which he passed on to Trump, since this "obama economy" was largely debt-driven.


What specific policies have been enacted that were "pro-business and anti-regulation" that have caused our current strong econmy?

Because honestly, the current economy is basically in line with what you would expect if you had just continued every single trend under Obama.

From the outside it just looks like you're making vague claims of "pro-business anti-regulation" to give Trump credit, while ignoring that his economy is also "debt-driven", even though you are taking away credit from Obama for having a "debt-driven" economy.

Certain things I can see for Trump on making a stronger economy is that his tax plan did include a tax cut for the lower classes, and his EPA is run by a corporate shill. The latter, however, has been largely stymied by Trump's unwillingness to properly staff the department though, so they haven't been able to enact much actual policy out of the EPA because they can barely fulfill daily operations.
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev1199619971998199920003169Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll