The Bern endoses Hillary

[fskimospy]

lol! What a howler - the self-made billionaire businessman is "nearly entirely incompetent when it comes to even basic economics, much less the economics of trade."

Even "it depends of what the meaning of 'is' is" can't compete with this one.

You do realize that running a business has basically nothing to do with macroeconomics or trade economics, right? It's like saying if you are good at driving a car you know the engine works.

Thanks for unintentionally owning yourself, haha.

 

[ivwshane]

lol! What a howler - the self-made billionaire businessman is "nearly entirely incompetent when it comes to even basic economics, much less the economics of trade."

Even "it depends of what the meaning of 'is' is" can't compete with this one.

You must have a weird definition of what self-made means.

 

[fskimospy]

You must have a weird definition of what self-made means.

Haha, I didn't even notice that one. It's kind of funny that his post was not just hilariously wrong for assuming that success in business somehow equated to knowledge of economics but it's very true that Trump might not even have been a successful businessman.

If anyone's interested in a pretty thorough discussion of just how silly werepossum's point was this is a good read:

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

In the scientific world, the syndrome known as “great man’s disease” happens when a famous researcher in one field develops strong opinions about another field that he or she does not understand, such as a chemist who decides that he is an expert in medicine or a physicist who decides that he is an expert in cognitive science. The same syndrome is apparent in some business leaders who have been promoted to economic advisers: They have trouble accepting that they must go back to school before they can make pronouncements in a new field.

The general principles on which an economy must be run are different—not harder to understand, but different—from those that apply to a business. An executive who is thoroughly comfortable with business accounting does not automatically know how to read national income accounts, which measure different things and use different concepts. Personnel management and labor law are not the same thing; neither are corporate financial control and monetary policy. A business leader who wants to become an economic manager or expert must learn a new vocabulary and set of concepts, some of them unavoidably mathematical.

 

[Jhhnn]

lol! What a howler - the self-made billionaire businessman is "nearly entirely incompetent when it comes to even basic economics, much less the economics of trade."

Even "it depends of what the meaning of 'is' is" can't compete with this one.

Please. His financing & that of the govt are entirely different animals. he suggests we can borrow more money & then force our creditors to take a haircut if things go south. You know, like Greece. Great idea, huh?

http://www.npr.org/2016/05/09/47735...deas-for-handling-the-national-debt-explained

 

[agent00f]

So it liberalizes our markets but doesn't really solve for the problems our markets face in competing in foreign markets, which is why it is anticipated to shave off some gdp and be net negative according to a few studies I have read from sell side shops and academia.

This is the problem with libertopians and free trade advocates. The rest of the world doesn't give a shit about the notion of free trade, only we do, and they take advantage of it. Pretty much every other country looks out for themselves and takes advantage of that by buying our politicians to cuck our country.

Add to that liberal notions that the "free hand" needs to be shackled by idiocy like the cfpb, and you get an unfettered rape of our economy. Sure, people like you say that it's because we deserve it, share the wealth globally, but that's a naive position, one which the Chinese love to manipulate.

Yes, stability in a currency is desired, but not at the cost of free float to reach a natural equalibrium with trade imbalances. China bootstrapped their economy up via currency manipulation at the cost of millions of us jobs. That anybody would not consider that as priority #1 when dealing in trade agreements is utter stupidity and consideration towards the little people for that is utterly required. Your contempt for the little people lays bare your true allegiances.

You're not really understanding what I've been saying. The trade policies negotiated here are good for the ownership class they're relevant to. They do so out of self-interest just like all good capitalists should, and that could mean selling the little people down the river for all they care. The chinese ownership class on the other side of the table do the same, except they're somewhat better with long-term strategic planning.

The core problem is you've only been taught to draw the lines at national boundaries, when what you're bitching for (the little people) are hardly getting sold by the chinese. It only used to be a bit better for the plebs here because it was acceptable to subjugate the third world and take their shit, but now that option is increasing off the table so the elites turn to the next best option.

I'm just explaining the how reality of this works, because understanding the situation is the first step towards doing anything about it. But hey, plebs gonna pleb.

 

[werepossum]

You do realize that running a business has basically nothing to do with macroeconomics or trade economics, right? It's like saying if you are good at driving a car you know the engine works.

Thanks for unintentionally owning yourself, haha.

Sorry, but you specifically said "basic economics". For some weird reason, for a minute I actually thought you meant "basic economics".

 

[blankslate]

This isn't really some sort of vindictiveness on part of elites or whatever, it's just how the system is supposed to function.

I never said it was vindictiveness on the part of elites.

It's not that they're purposefully holding down the common man it's that the negotiators and the people who report on the news about the TPP (and more often don't report on it as well as the effects of other trade deals) just exist in social circles where they know very few if anyone who was impacted by the trade deals of the past 20 or so years in a negative manner.

I was implying that they are pretty much unaware of how most people
believe trade deals affect the middle class.


Perhaps the economy should be there to serve more people instead of the fortunate few.

That is a broader subject beyond the subject of the thread title... I think it got derailed personally since few recent posts are about "Way to go Bernie for endorsing Clinton" or "You suck Bernie for selling out to Clinton"

I'm pretty sure my response was somewhere in the middle of those two extremes. Then it got into "why U No supporting democrat party choice" which led to trade deal debates.

but this is my response to the thread title.... I'll remind you that I live in a blue state that is polling for Hillary by a large margin and if I was in a swing state I would probably have said something different.

Still not voting for her.


I understand Senator Sanders endorsing her. He said he would do it if he didn't win the nomination. He's staying true to his word. He tried as far as I can tell to get as many progressive / liberal positions into the democratic platform. It's people who want to be "realists" that helped stymie his efforts... so thanks for that asshats.


I'm looking at a third party vote.

Can't vote for someone who is supporting the TPP. Remember it's not what they say it's what they do. She appointed platform committee members who supported the TPP. that speaks louder than words.

and I'll leave it at that since this has all become rather circular.


______________

 

[agent00f]

I was implying that they are pretty much unaware of how most people
believe trade deals affect the middle class.

Take a min to ponder the ownership class's pr machine hiring practices.

Like if you were in their shoes who would best (re)present your interests. Personally I think that guy really smooth at blaming everything on foreigners looks pretty good.

Perhaps the economy should be there to serve more people instead of the fortunate few.

You would think that'd be the case in a democracy, but pr professionals are also really good at their job.

That is a broader subject beyond the subject of the thread title... I think it got derailed personally since few recent posts are about "Way to go Bernie for endorsing Clinton" or "You suck Bernie for selling out to Clinton"

I'm pretty sure my response was somewhere in the middle of those two extremes. Then it got into "why U No supporting democrat party choice" which led to trade deal debates.

but this is my response to the thread title.... I'll remind you that I live in a blue state that is polling for Hillary by a large margin and if I was in a swing state I would probably have said something different.

______________

I only read the last page or so. Sanders is probably a better candidate than Clinton for the prols, but he didn't win so that's how the cookie crumbles for them.