Thursday, January 11, 2018

Economists Credit Trump for U.S. Growth, Hiring and Stocks

Economists surveyed by The Wall Street Journal say President Donald Trump has had generally positive effects on U.S. economic growth, hiring and the performance of the stock market during his first year in office.

The professional forecasters also predicted 2018 would see solid growth and a continued decline in the jobless rate. One factor: the tax cuts signed into law by Mr. Trump in December, which most economists say will boost the economy for several years at least.

More broadly, most forecasters surveyed by the Journal suggested Mr. Trump's election deserves at least some credit for the economy's recent strength.

More

Asked to rate Mr. Trump's policies and actions to date, a majority of economists said he had been somewhat or strongly positive for job creation, gross domestic product growth and the stock market. Most also said he had been either neutral or positive for the country's long-term growth trajectory, while his influence on financial stability was seen as largely neutral.

A year ago, President Barack Obama got mixed grades as he prepared to leave office after eight years. Most economists surveyed by the Journal in January 2017 saw his policies as positive for financial stability, positive or neutral for job creation, negative or neutral for GDP growth and negative for long-term potential growth.

Comments

*FOOM*

-Liberal Heads Exploding

#1 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-01-11 09:56 PM

The WSJ, lol. And behind a paywall so we can't read it.

But who'd a thunk there'd be a short term boost in corporate joy with a yuuge permanent tax cut for them and a pittance of a short term tax cut for most Americans?

Amazing results!

#2 | Posted by Corky at 2018-01-11 10:00 PM

"One factor: the tax cuts signed into law by Mr. Trump in December, which most economists say will boost the economy for several years at least. "

Yeah.
One-time bonuses boost the economy once, for a month or so.

#3 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-11 10:08 PM

"Still, many economists are skeptical that the tax cut will have a meaningful impact on wages. In an economic research memo released on Thursday, Goldman Sachs wrote that "we expect no significant short-term effect of tax reform on" average hourly earnings."

www.nytimes.com

#4 | Posted by Corky at 2018-01-11 11:05 PM

Does Dotard get the credit for all of those Sam's Clubs that went ---- up today?

#5 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2018-01-11 11:17 PM

The key there, Dorky, is "short term", but keep reaching for bad news, it suits you.

#6 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-01-11 11:19 PM

You mean a paper owned by Rupert Murdoch found a handful economists who like trump, what a shocker!

#7 | Posted by PunchyPossum at 2018-01-11 11:21 PM

#5

Costco probably gets the nod for those closures.

#8 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-01-11 11:22 PM

#7

You should put some cream on that butthurt.

#9 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-01-11 11:24 PM

9 | Posted by Rightocenter at 201

thats your response? what a complete ass you are.

#10 | Posted by PunchyPossum at 2018-01-11 11:35 PM

You are belittling the preeminent financial paper in the US solely based on your confirmation bias, what did you expect?

Come up with a well sourced retort or STFU.

#11 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-01-11 11:38 PM

"You are belittling the preeminent financial paper in the US solely based on your confirmation bias"

FLAP FLAP FLAP!

#12 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-11 11:42 PM

#12

Punchy's circle flapping, I think that an improving economy is great news.

How about you?

#13 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-01-11 11:53 PM

"I think that an improving economy is great news."

Then why wasn't it great news for the prior 8 years? What changed, pray tell?

#14 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-01-11 11:56 PM

"You are belittling the preeminent financial paper in the US"

They deserve to be belittled. They're the same ones who printed Tax Cuts Increase Revenue, and then "proved" it by using nominal dollars, a method which will get an Econ 101 student flunked out by the midterm. The London FT is much more brutally honest than the suck-ups at the WSJ.

#15 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-01-12 12:04 AM

#6

The "key", Porky, is that Tinkle Down has never, ever, werked for the average American.

Which, of course, isn't necessary to have your ilk keep pimping it for your Masters.

#16 | Posted by Corky at 2018-01-12 12:31 AM

What changed, pray tell?

"A year ago, President Barack Obama got mixed grades as he prepared to leave office after eight years. Most economists surveyed by the Journal in January 2017 saw his policies as positive for financial stability, positive or neutral for job creation, negative or neutral for GDP growth and negative for long-term potential growth."

Positive growth.

Even the FT is acknowledging this.

Sorry that destroys your precious narrative.

#17 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-01-12 12:36 AM

Job growth has slowed. How is that an improvement?

#18 | Posted by bored at 2018-01-12 12:39 AM

#18

Ever hear of a concept called "full employment" and its impact on job creation? Didnt think so.

Guess what happens next?

I'll give you a hint, it starts with wage and ends with growth.

#19 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-01-12 01:06 AM

#19

Ends with.... Magic Growth! Yeah, that's the ticket! That's why the Deficit doesn't matter! We'll have Magic Growth of 5... no, 12 percent! Yeah... and I'm married to Morgan Fairchild, yeah!

#20 | Posted by Corky at 2018-01-12 01:20 AM

Guess that Russian collusion works well...

#21 | Posted by Greatamerican at 2018-01-12 01:32 AM

#19 So you are saying Obama ended his terms at near full employment after starting off with the great GOP recession.
That is impressive.
Then Trump convinced his voters that only he could bring jobs back (failing) to a near full employment economy. That is SAD!

#22 | Posted by bored at 2018-01-12 02:10 AM

"Sorry that destroys your precious narrative."

Doesn't destroy a thing. Obama beat all of the goals Romney set, and Rs still complained.

"Even the FT is acknowledging this."

I'd already pointed out the FT is much more honest than the WSJ. Thanks for proving my point.

#23 | Posted by Danforth at 2018-01-12 06:45 AM

As vapid and crazy as Donald is, giving him positive credit for anything is an act of misplaced politeness.

#24 | Posted by Zed at 2018-01-12 06:58 AM

As shown above, we got nothing...

-The DR Left

#25 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-01-12 10:31 AM

"I think that an improving economy is great news." - #13 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-01-11 11:53 PM

Thank you President Obama.

#26 | Posted by Hans at 2018-01-12 10:41 AM

here we go again

rightoe Jumps the Shark!

it's only a matter of time before this ululating gets replaced with realty

and rightoe knows it so he must cock-a-doodle-doo it up while he has a chance

like a coked-up trump trollop

#27 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2018-01-12 10:44 AM

26

Do you accept that it's an improving economy?

If so, fine. If not then don't credit anybody.

#28 | Posted by eberly at 2018-01-12 11:31 AM

"Do you accept that it's an improving economy?" - #28 | Posted by eberly at 2018-01-12 11:31 AM

It has been improving.

Since about the end of 2009/beginning of 2010.

Thanks, President Obama.

#29 | Posted by Hans at 2018-01-12 11:42 AM

29

Cool.

#30 | Posted by eberly at 2018-01-12 11:53 AM

Let's see.... unpeeled some onerous regulations-uncorked the energy industry -- signed a business friendly tax law... yeah, good economic growth is the expected outcome from these policies.

#31 | Posted by JeffJ at 2018-01-12 12:42 PM

"onerous regulations"

Such as?

#32 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-12 01:34 PM

The WSJ, lol. And behind a paywall so we can't read it.

It's funny how Dorky has been instructing everyone how to go Incognito to go around paywalls with impunity but when it is an article that eviscerates his confirmation bias and narrative he is completely helpless.

#33 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-01-12 01:36 PM

"onerous regulations"
Such as?

#32 | POSTED BY SNOOFY AT 2018-01-12 01:34 PM

Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said Friday that President Trump is "systematically" removing hundreds of regulations put in place by the Obama administration.

"The president has already knocked out some 860 rules and regulations from the Obama administration, and every day we're finding more and more to do. Remember, Obama put in something like 7,000 new rules and regulations just in the last two years he was in office," Mr. Ross said on Fox Business.

When asked what types of regulations Mr. Trump was removing -- whether oil and gas, environmental or banking -- the secretary responded, "All of the above."

"You would think the American public was a wild and woolly place two years earlier to require 7,000 new rules. But the president is systematically removing them, changing them, getting rid of them. And I think we'll beat his formula of two reductions for one increase," he said.

Mr. Ross said the upturn in the economy is due to the loosening of these regulations, and companies have said they feel the relief of less regulation and enforcement.

Trump has altered over 800 Obama-era regulations

There is this thing called "Google", you should try it some time.

#34 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2018-01-12 01:40 PM

speaking of google

apparently rightoe never googled how often the WSJ has gotten things all wrong

#35 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2018-01-12 02:01 PM

Yeah Jeff, here's one of those onerous regulations he just got rid of.

"Did President Trump Make It Legal to Dump Coal Mining Waste Into Streams?
A joint resolution headed for President Trump's signature would repeal a law that limited mining companies' ability to dump earthen mining waste into streams, but this resolution actually represents a return to a status that has been in effect, intermittently, since 1983."

www.snopes.com

#36 | Posted by danni at 2018-01-12 02:01 PM

Yeah Jeff, here's one of those onerous regulations he just got rid of.

"Did President Trump Make It Legal to Dump Coal Mining Waste Into Streams?
A joint resolution headed for President Trump's signature would repeal a law that limited mining companies' ability to dump earthen mining waste into streams, but this resolution actually represents a return to a status that has been in effect, intermittently, since 1983."

www.snopes.com

Posted by danni at 2018-01-12 02:01 PM | Reply

Jeff doewsn't care about environmental issues nor does he understand them.

#37 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2018-01-12 03:30 PM

Why is the economy improving a good thing?

Do the cheerleaders know?

That wage increase they are talking about. When will it come?

We've done it a thousand times and very the opposite of what they claim

#38 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2018-01-12 05:24 PM

6 years of economic growth under Obama, 2010-2016. Boom! Rightoboutnothing's head exploding!

#39 | Posted by e1g1 at 2018-01-13 02:01 PM

Even Jamie Dimon has called for a while 4% gdp in 2018.

Lets be clear, the gdp and the markets have soared under the new administration. And that's not what you all predicted on 11/8/2016. That's a fact.

So it makes sense that the highest consumer sentiment in 10 years doesn't compute to you.

What is hilarious is how how trivialize the tax cuts. You must forget what Obama said about 40 bucks a week to someone earning 50k a year. How dare you pretend you didn't support that amount in 2011!!!

m.youtube.com

#40 | Posted by DavetheWave at 2018-01-13 08:04 PM

"You must forget what Obama said about 40 bucks a week to someone earning 50k a year. "

How much money does Trump's tax plan get them?

#41 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-13 08:45 PM

39 Obama had the worst recovery after any recession since WW1. Gdp was horrific. And if it hadn't been for QE 123 it would have been worse

#42 | Posted by DavetheWave at 2018-01-13 08:55 PM

How much money does Trump's tax plan get them?

#44 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-13 09:26 PM

44 what now you care? I believe it a raise for most in the 20 to 90k income brackets.

#45 | Posted by DavetheWave at 2018-01-14 12:04 PM

How much?

#46 | Posted by snoofy at 2018-01-14 02:37 PM

Many employees will begin to see increases in their paychecks to reflect the new law in February. The time it will take for employees to see the changes in their paychecks will vary depending on how quickly the new tables are implemented by their employers and how often they are paid -- generally weekly, biweekly or monthly.

Irs web page

#47 | Posted by DavetheWave at 2018-01-14 05:05 PM

Drudge Retort Headlines

3 More Deputies On Scene Did Not Enter School (108 comments)

House Intel Committee Releases Democratic Memo (100 comments)

China: America's Easy Gun Sales a Human Rights Problem (40 comments)

Rice 'Justifiably Concerned' Sharing Intel with Trump Administration (37 comments)

Poll: Trump Ratings Match His Lowest (33 comments)

What Life Without Retirement Savings Looks Like (32 comments)

Ted Cruz: 'Democrats Are the Party of Lisa Simpson' (28 comments)

Trump Reads Racist Anti-Immigrant Lyrics at CPAC (28 comments)

EPA Chief Says Bible Defends His Environmental Policies (25 comments)