14% of Economist Say Trump Would Be The Best For The Economy

[Wyatt earp]

"A policy survey of National Association for Business Economics (NABE) members released Monday shows that 55% of business economists feel that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would do the best job as president of managing the U.S. economy. The candidate with the next-largest percentage of the vote was Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson: 15% of NABE members said he’d do the best job managing the economy. Another 15% or respondents said they didn’t know who would be best or that they didn’t have an opinion.
Just 14% chose Donald Trump.
The survey results are remarkable because NABE members aren’t your average ivory tower-dwelling, left-leaning egg heads. They work for businesses, trade associations and government agencies across the country. As NABE director and survey chair LaVaughn Henry put it, these are people who have skin in the game.
“You’re speaking of people who advise business leaders on day-to-day and long term issues where the outcome has to be one way or the other, it can’t just be, ‘let’s study it or research it forever,’” he told FORBES in a recent interview. “These are people who are actually helping to make decisions of do we produce here, or do we produce oversees; do we consume more, consume less.”
By 4 to 1 margin, business economists say Clinton would manage economy better than Trump
America's business economist have spoken, Donald Trump wouldn't make America great. I know I am surprised, based on Trump's history.

Real simple even a brain dead liberal can comprehend this


People want to invest with a business friendly republican president

Not so much with a anti business liberal progressive blow hard president.

Just like GW Bush was compared to Bill Clinton...

Oh!!! Wait....

Say after me moron


Dot.com

Reagan

Bush Jr > led to the 90s

 

[Wyatt earp]

"A policy survey of National Association for Business Economics (NABE) members released Monday shows that 55% of business economists feel that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would do the best job as president of managing the U.S. economy. The candidate with the next-largest percentage of the vote was Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson: 15% of NABE members said he’d do the best job managing the economy. Another 15% or respondents said they didn’t know who would be best or that they didn’t have an opinion.
Just 14% chose Donald Trump.
The survey results are remarkable because NABE members aren’t your average ivory tower-dwelling, left-leaning egg heads. They work for businesses, trade associations and government agencies across the country. As NABE director and survey chair LaVaughn Henry put it, these are people who have skin in the game.
“You’re speaking of people who advise business leaders on day-to-day and long term issues where the outcome has to be one way or the other, it can’t just be, ‘let’s study it or research it forever,’” he told FORBES in a recent interview. “These are people who are actually helping to make decisions of do we produce here, or do we produce oversees; do we consume more, consume less.”
By 4 to 1 margin, business economists say Clinton would manage economy better than Trump
America's business economist have spoken, Donald Trump wouldn't make America great. I know I am surprised, based on Trump's history.

Real simple even a brain dead liberal can comprehend this


People want to invest with a business friendly republican president

Not so much with a anti business liberal progressive blow hard president.

It's very clear that a majority of business economists disagree with your amateur hyper-partisan opinion.

Yet you and your professional business economist are completely baffled by this?



http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/01/24/magazine/why-are-corporations-hoarding-trillions.html

From 2011 obama crying for company's to invest .

http://thehill.com/homenews/news/142469-obama-asks-business-to-do-their-part-in-recovery

 

[Wyatt earp]

"A policy survey of National Association for Business Economics (NABE) members released Monday shows that 55% of business economists feel that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would do the best job as president of managing the U.S. economy. The candidate with the next-largest percentage of the vote was Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson: 15% of NABE members said he’d do the best job managing the economy. Another 15% or respondents said they didn’t know who would be best or that they didn’t have an opinion.
Just 14% chose Donald Trump.
The survey results are remarkable because NABE members aren’t your average ivory tower-dwelling, left-leaning egg heads. They work for businesses, trade associations and government agencies across the country. As NABE director and survey chair LaVaughn Henry put it, these are people who have skin in the game.
“You’re speaking of people who advise business leaders on day-to-day and long term issues where the outcome has to be one way or the other, it can’t just be, ‘let’s study it or research it forever,’” he told FORBES in a recent interview. “These are people who are actually helping to make decisions of do we produce here, or do we produce oversees; do we consume more, consume less.”
By 4 to 1 margin, business economists say Clinton would manage economy better than Trump
America's business economist have spoken, Donald Trump wouldn't make America great. I know I am surprised, based on Trump's history.

Real simple even a brain dead liberal can comprehend this


People want to invest with a business friendly republican president

Not so much with a anti business liberal progressive blow hard president.

It's very clear that a majority of business economists disagree with your amateur hyper-partisan opinion.

Want more? 2010





$30 Billion Offer No One Wants – Small Businesses Hit by Deflation | MishTalk


When government passes out the money normally people are lined up, in advance, with both hands out. When that does not happen, it’s because the offer smells like a rotten fish.

Please check out Obama’s latest rotten fish offering as described inSmall businesses, community bankers may snub Obama’s $30 billion loan program


President Barack Obama’s $30 billion small community business lending program faces one big challenge: many of the community banks and businesses it’s supposed to help don’t want it.


The lending program is part of a bill that passed the House of Representatives on Thursday and now awaits the president’s signature. The legislation contains a mix of tax cuts and credits aimed at helping small businesses. The centerpiece of the bill is an effort to make billions of dollars available to community banks for loans to small businesses.

Bank executives say their customers don’t want loans, even at low interest rates, because the sluggish economy has chilled expansion plans. Some say the federal money isn’t worth it because they fear it will come with too much regulatory oversight

 

[Al Azar]

Dude, we've done pretty much non-stop quantitative easing and near zero interest rates at the Fed for the past eight years. THAT'S why the stock market bubble has occurred. If you don't believe me then look at what the market reaction is every time the Fed even hints at a POSSIBLE rate increase!

Which makes no sense at all, because the reason for the rate hike is that the situation in improving.

It's like the low oil prices. Almost every economic sector other than oil benefits from lower transportation costs, yet the market views low prices as bad and high prices as healthy.

Market perception is disconnected from reality. That's a risk in itself.

 

[BluesLegend]

Establishment employees of the establishment support the establishment candidate, shocker. /sarcasm

 

[Oldstyle]

Dude, we've done pretty much non-stop quantitative easing and near zero interest rates at the Fed for the past eight years. THAT'S why the stock market bubble has occurred. If you don't believe me then look at what the market reaction is every time the Fed even hints at a POSSIBLE rate increase!

Which makes no sense at all, because the reason for the rate hike is that the situation in improving.

It's like the low oil prices. Almost every economic sector other than oil benefits from lower transportation costs, yet the market views low prices as bad and high prices as healthy.

Market perception is disconnected from reality. That's a risk in itself.

I'm amused by progressives that now want to claim that a "resurgent" stock exchange means their policies are working! I don't think most of them have the faintest idea what makes the market move up or down. It's not something that you learn in a Political Science class.

 

[Oldstyle]

"A policy survey of National Association for Business Economics (NABE) members released Monday shows that 55% of business economists feel that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would do the best job as president of managing the U.S. economy. The candidate with the next-largest percentage of the vote was Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson: 15% of NABE members said he’d do the best job managing the economy. Another 15% or respondents said they didn’t know who would be best or that they didn’t have an opinion.
Just 14% chose Donald Trump.
The survey results are remarkable because NABE members aren’t your average ivory tower-dwelling, left-leaning egg heads. They work for businesses, trade associations and government agencies across the country. As NABE director and survey chair LaVaughn Henry put it, these are people who have skin in the game.
“You’re speaking of people who advise business leaders on day-to-day and long term issues where the outcome has to be one way or the other, it can’t just be, ‘let’s study it or research it forever,’” he told FORBES in a recent interview. “These are people who are actually helping to make decisions of do we produce here, or do we produce oversees; do we consume more, consume less.”
By 4 to 1 margin, business economists say Clinton would manage economy better than Trump
America's business economist have spoken, Donald Trump wouldn't make America great. I know I am surprised, based on Trump's history.

Real simple even a brain dead liberal can comprehend this


People want to invest with a business friendly republican president

Not so much with a anti business liberal progressive blow hard president.

It's very clear that a majority of business economists disagree with your amateur hyper-partisan opinion.

Want more? 2010





$30 Billion Offer No One Wants – Small Businesses Hit by Deflation | MishTalk


When government passes out the money normally people are lined up, in advance, with both hands out. When that does not happen, it’s because the offer smells like a rotten fish.

Please check out Obama’s latest rotten fish offering as described inSmall businesses, community bankers may snub Obama’s $30 billion loan program


President Barack Obama’s $30 billion small community business lending program faces one big challenge: many of the community banks and businesses it’s supposed to help don’t want it.


The lending program is part of a bill that passed the House of Representatives on Thursday and now awaits the president’s signature. The legislation contains a mix of tax cuts and credits aimed at helping small businesses. The centerpiece of the bill is an effort to make billions of dollars available to community banks for loans to small businesses.

Bank executives say their customers don’t want loans, even at low interest rates, because the sluggish economy has chilled expansion plans. Some say the federal money isn’t worth it because they fear it will come with too much regulatory oversight

Here's the thing that liberals always struggle with when it comes to the economy. They can't understand why a business owner wouldn't jump at the chance to take out a loan to expand their business. The concept that the Private Sector works through an anticipation of profit goes right over their heads. You entice them to go into debt by offering a loan but at the very same time you also tell them that you intend to increase their energy costs by getting rid of cheap coal generated electricity...increase their labor costs by pushing for a $15 an hour minimum wage...and if they DO manage to make a profit you intend to increase their taxes on that profit. What person in their right mind would make that kind of deal?

 

[Al Azar]

I'm amused by progressives that now want to claim that a "resurgent" stock exchange means their policies are working! I don't think most of them have the faintest idea what makes the market move up or down. It's not something that you learn in a Political Science class.

Markets move on perception. Read enough posts on this forum and you will see that perception doesn't necessarily jibe with reality.

 

[IsaacNewton]

"A policy survey of National Association for Business Economics (NABE) members released Monday shows that 55% of business economists feel that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would do the best job as president of managing the U.S. economy. The candidate with the next-largest percentage of the vote was Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson: 15% of NABE members said he’d do the best job managing the economy. Another 15% or respondents said they didn’t know who would be best or that they didn’t have an opinion.
Just 14% chose Donald Trump.
The survey results are remarkable because NABE members aren’t your average ivory tower-dwelling, left-leaning egg heads. They work for businesses, trade associations and government agencies across the country. As NABE director and survey chair LaVaughn Henry put it, these are people who have skin in the game.
“You’re speaking of people who advise business leaders on day-to-day and long term issues where the outcome has to be one way or the other, it can’t just be, ‘let’s study it or research it forever,’” he told FORBES in a recent interview. “These are people who are actually helping to make decisions of do we produce here, or do we produce oversees; do we consume more, consume less.”
By 4 to 1 margin, business economists say Clinton would manage economy better than Trump
America's business economist have spoken, Donald Trump wouldn't make America great. I know I am surprised, based on Trump's history.

Real simple even a brain dead liberal can comprehend this


People want to invest with a business friendly republican president

Not so much with a anti business liberal progressive blow hard president.

It's very clear that a majority of business economists disagree with your amateur hyper-partisan opinion.

Want more? 2010





$30 Billion Offer No One Wants – Small Businesses Hit by Deflation | MishTalk


When government passes out the money normally people are lined up, in advance, with both hands out. When that does not happen, it’s because the offer smells like a rotten fish.

Please check out Obama’s latest rotten fish offering as described inSmall businesses, community bankers may snub Obama’s $30 billion loan program


President Barack Obama’s $30 billion small community business lending program faces one big challenge: many of the community banks and businesses it’s supposed to help don’t want it.


The lending program is part of a bill that passed the House of Representatives on Thursday and now awaits the president’s signature. The legislation contains a mix of tax cuts and credits aimed at helping small businesses. The centerpiece of the bill is an effort to make billions of dollars available to community banks for loans to small businesses.

Bank executives say their customers don’t want loans, even at low interest rates, because the sluggish economy has chilled expansion plans. Some say the federal money isn’t worth it because they fear it will come with too much regulatory oversight

Here's the thing that liberals always struggle with when it comes to the economy. They can't understand why a business owner wouldn't jump at the chance to take out a loan to expand their business. The concept that the Private Sector works through an anticipation of profit goes right over their heads. You entice them to go into debt by offering a loan but at the very same time you also tell them that you intend to increase their energy costs by getting rid of cheap coal generated electricity...increase their labor costs by pushing for a $15 an hour minimum wage...and if they DO manage to make a profit you intend to increase their taxes on that profit. What person in their right mind would make that kind of deal?

Anyone that owns a business and assumes future commodity costs will not go up is someone that no bank should lend money to. That is living in lala land. You seem to think, in conservative economic THEORY land, that all costs are fixed. Walk into any back and say "yeah I have this idea to expand my business based on no costs of doing business going up for the next 5 years". They'll say "well then you can fund your expansion with imaginary money as well, have a nice day".

 

[oldsoul]

"A policy survey of National Association for Business Economics (NABE) members released Monday shows that 55% of business economists feel that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would do the best job as president of managing the U.S. economy. The candidate with the next-largest percentage of the vote was Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson: 15% of NABE members said he’d do the best job managing the economy. Another 15% or respondents said they didn’t know who would be best or that they didn’t have an opinion.
Just 14% chose Donald Trump.
The survey results are remarkable because NABE members aren’t your average ivory tower-dwelling, left-leaning egg heads. They work for businesses, trade associations and government agencies across the country. As NABE director and survey chair LaVaughn Henry put it, these are people who have skin in the game.
“You’re speaking of people who advise business leaders on day-to-day and long term issues where the outcome has to be one way or the other, it can’t just be, ‘let’s study it or research it forever,’” he told FORBES in a recent interview. “These are people who are actually helping to make decisions of do we produce here, or do we produce oversees; do we consume more, consume less.”
By 4 to 1 margin, business economists say Clinton would manage economy better than Trump
America's business economist have spoken, Donald Trump wouldn't make America great. I know I am surprised, based on Trump's history.

Real simple even a brain dead liberal can comprehend this


People want to invest with a business friendly republican president

Not so much with a anti business liberal progressive blow hard president.

It's very clear that a majority of business economists disagree with your amateur hyper-partisan opinion.

Want more? 2010





$30 Billion Offer No One Wants – Small Businesses Hit by Deflation | MishTalk


When government passes out the money normally people are lined up, in advance, with both hands out. When that does not happen, it’s because the offer smells like a rotten fish.

Please check out Obama’s latest rotten fish offering as described inSmall businesses, community bankers may snub Obama’s $30 billion loan program


President Barack Obama’s $30 billion small community business lending program faces one big challenge: many of the community banks and businesses it’s supposed to help don’t want it.


The lending program is part of a bill that passed the House of Representatives on Thursday and now awaits the president’s signature. The legislation contains a mix of tax cuts and credits aimed at helping small businesses. The centerpiece of the bill is an effort to make billions of dollars available to community banks for loans to small businesses.

Bank executives say their customers don’t want loans, even at low interest rates, because the sluggish economy has chilled expansion plans. Some say the federal money isn’t worth it because they fear it will come with too much regulatory oversight

Here's the thing that liberals always struggle with when it comes to the economy. They can't understand why a business owner wouldn't jump at the chance to take out a loan to expand their business. The concept that the Private Sector works through an anticipation of profit goes right over their heads. You entice them to go into debt by offering a loan but at the very same time you also tell them that you intend to increase their energy costs by getting rid of cheap coal generated electricity...increase their labor costs by pushing for a $15 an hour minimum wage...and if they DO manage to make a profit you intend to increase their taxes on that profit. What person in their right mind would make that kind of deal?

Anyone that owns a business and assumes future commodity costs will not go up is someone that no bank should lend money to. That is living in lala land. You seem to think, in conservative economic THEORY land, that all costs are fixed. Walk into any back and say "yeah I have this idea to expand my business based on no costs of doing business going up for the next 5 years". They'll say "well then you can fund your expansion with imaginary money as well, have a nice day".

See, here's where oh so many liberals fail to understand reality. There is a difference between normal increases in commodities, as you put it, and forced, and therefore unnatural, increases in said "commodities". That is the difference, successful business people understand that prices will go up, but they are wary of artificial (forced) increases, because the effects are far less predictable.

 

[Star]

"A policy survey of National Association for Business Economics (NABE) members released Monday shows that 55% of business economists feel that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would do the best job as president of managing the U.S. economy. The candidate with the next-largest percentage of the vote was Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson: 15% of NABE members said he’d do the best job managing the economy. Another 15% or respondents said they didn’t know who would be best or that they didn’t have an opinion.
Just 14% chose Donald Trump.
The survey results are remarkable because NABE members aren’t your average ivory tower-dwelling, left-leaning egg heads. They work for businesses, trade associations and government agencies across the country. As NABE director and survey chair LaVaughn Henry put it, these are people who have skin in the game.
“You’re speaking of people who advise business leaders on day-to-day and long term issues where the outcome has to be one way or the other, it can’t just be, ‘let’s study it or research it forever,’” he told FORBES in a recent interview. “These are people who are actually helping to make decisions of do we produce here, or do we produce oversees; do we consume more, consume less.”
By 4 to 1 margin, business economists say Clinton would manage economy better than Trump
America's business economist have spoken, Donald Trump wouldn't make America great. I know I am surprised, based on Trump's history.

Real simple even a brain dead liberal can comprehend this


People want to invest with a business friendly republican president

Not so much with a anti business liberal progressive blow hard president.

Really! How do you square your above post with reality?

Based on real world empirical evidence, the opposite of your post is true and-----and if the market is your criteria for economic success you'll be voting for Clinton - right?

S&P 500 Performance by President
This interactive chart shows the running percentage gain in the S&P 500 by Presidential term. Each series begins in the month of inauguration and runs to the end of the term. The y-axis shows the total percentage increase or decrease in the S&P 500 and the x-axis shows the term length in months. Click any president name in the legend to add or remove graph lines.




.​

 

[IsaacNewton]

Real simple even a brain dead liberal can comprehend this


People want to invest with a business friendly republican president

Not so much with a anti business liberal progressive blow hard president.

It's very clear that a majority of business economists disagree with your amateur hyper-partisan opinion.

Want more? 2010





$30 Billion Offer No One Wants – Small Businesses Hit by Deflation | MishTalk


When government passes out the money normally people are lined up, in advance, with both hands out. When that does not happen, it’s because the offer smells like a rotten fish.

Please check out Obama’s latest rotten fish offering as described inSmall businesses, community bankers may snub Obama’s $30 billion loan program


President Barack Obama’s $30 billion small community business lending program faces one big challenge: many of the community banks and businesses it’s supposed to help don’t want it.


The lending program is part of a bill that passed the House of Representatives on Thursday and now awaits the president’s signature. The legislation contains a mix of tax cuts and credits aimed at helping small businesses. The centerpiece of the bill is an effort to make billions of dollars available to community banks for loans to small businesses.

Bank executives say their customers don’t want loans, even at low interest rates, because the sluggish economy has chilled expansion plans. Some say the federal money isn’t worth it because they fear it will come with too much regulatory oversight

Here's the thing that liberals always struggle with when it comes to the economy. They can't understand why a business owner wouldn't jump at the chance to take out a loan to expand their business. The concept that the Private Sector works through an anticipation of profit goes right over their heads. You entice them to go into debt by offering a loan but at the very same time you also tell them that you intend to increase their energy costs by getting rid of cheap coal generated electricity...increase their labor costs by pushing for a $15 an hour minimum wage...and if they DO manage to make a profit you intend to increase their taxes on that profit. What person in their right mind would make that kind of deal?

Anyone that owns a business and assumes future commodity costs will not go up is someone that no bank should lend money to. That is living in lala land. You seem to think, in conservative economic THEORY land, that all costs are fixed. Walk into any back and say "yeah I have this idea to expand my business based on no costs of doing business going up for the next 5 years". They'll say "well then you can fund your expansion with imaginary money as well, have a nice day".

See, here's where oh so many liberals fail to understand reality. There is a difference between normal increases in commodities, as you put it, and forced, and therefore unnatural, increases in said "commodities". That is the difference, successful business people understand that prices will go up, but they are wary of artificial (forced) increases, because the effects are far less predictable.

Riiight.

 

[IsaacNewton]

"A policy survey of National Association for Business Economics (NABE) members released Monday shows that 55% of business economists feel that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would do the best job as president of managing the U.S. economy. The candidate with the next-largest percentage of the vote was Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson: 15% of NABE members said he’d do the best job managing the economy. Another 15% or respondents said they didn’t know who would be best or that they didn’t have an opinion.
Just 14% chose Donald Trump.
The survey results are remarkable because NABE members aren’t your average ivory tower-dwelling, left-leaning egg heads. They work for businesses, trade associations and government agencies across the country. As NABE director and survey chair LaVaughn Henry put it, these are people who have skin in the game.
“You’re speaking of people who advise business leaders on day-to-day and long term issues where the outcome has to be one way or the other, it can’t just be, ‘let’s study it or research it forever,’” he told FORBES in a recent interview. “These are people who are actually helping to make decisions of do we produce here, or do we produce oversees; do we consume more, consume less.”
By 4 to 1 margin, business economists say Clinton would manage economy better than Trump
America's business economist have spoken, Donald Trump wouldn't make America great. I know I am surprised, based on Trump's history.

Real simple even a brain dead liberal can comprehend this


People want to invest with a business friendly republican president

Not so much with a anti business liberal progressive blow hard president.

Really! How do you square your above post with reality?

Based on real world empirical evidence, the opposite of your post is true and-----and if the market is your criteria for economic success you'll be voting for Clinton - right?

S&P 500 Performance by President
This interactive chart shows the running percentage gain in the S&P 500 by Presidential term. Each series begins in the month of inauguration and runs to the end of the term. The y-axis shows the total percentage increase or decrease in the S&P 500 and the x-axis shows the term length in months. Click any president name in the legend to add or remove graph lines.




.​

Clinton and Obama both outperformed Reagan by large margins. But conservatives need to feel like their surrogate grandpa was flawless so they'll reject this reality with all they have.

 

[320 Years of History]

NABE's Economic Policy Survey

 

[Oldstyle]

"A policy survey of National Association for Business Economics (NABE) members released Monday shows that 55% of business economists feel that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would do the best job as president of managing the U.S. economy. The candidate with the next-largest percentage of the vote was Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson: 15% of NABE members said he’d do the best job managing the economy. Another 15% or respondents said they didn’t know who would be best or that they didn’t have an opinion.
Just 14% chose Donald Trump.
The survey results are remarkable because NABE members aren’t your average ivory tower-dwelling, left-leaning egg heads. They work for businesses, trade associations and government agencies across the country. As NABE director and survey chair LaVaughn Henry put it, these are people who have skin in the game.
“You’re speaking of people who advise business leaders on day-to-day and long term issues where the outcome has to be one way or the other, it can’t just be, ‘let’s study it or research it forever,’” he told FORBES in a recent interview. “These are people who are actually helping to make decisions of do we produce here, or do we produce oversees; do we consume more, consume less.”
By 4 to 1 margin, business economists say Clinton would manage economy better than Trump
America's business economist have spoken, Donald Trump wouldn't make America great. I know I am surprised, based on Trump's history.

Real simple even a brain dead liberal can comprehend this


People want to invest with a business friendly republican president

Not so much with a anti business liberal progressive blow hard president.

It's very clear that a majority of business economists disagree with your amateur hyper-partisan opinion.

Want more? 2010





$30 Billion Offer No One Wants – Small Businesses Hit by Deflation | MishTalk


When government passes out the money normally people are lined up, in advance, with both hands out. When that does not happen, it’s because the offer smells like a rotten fish.

Please check out Obama’s latest rotten fish offering as described inSmall businesses, community bankers may snub Obama’s $30 billion loan program


President Barack Obama’s $30 billion small community business lending program faces one big challenge: many of the community banks and businesses it’s supposed to help don’t want it.


The lending program is part of a bill that passed the House of Representatives on Thursday and now awaits the president’s signature. The legislation contains a mix of tax cuts and credits aimed at helping small businesses. The centerpiece of the bill is an effort to make billions of dollars available to community banks for loans to small businesses.

Bank executives say their customers don’t want loans, even at low interest rates, because the sluggish economy has chilled expansion plans. Some say the federal money isn’t worth it because they fear it will come with too much regulatory oversight

Here's the thing that liberals always struggle with when it comes to the economy. They can't understand why a business owner wouldn't jump at the chance to take out a loan to expand their business. The concept that the Private Sector works through an anticipation of profit goes right over their heads. You entice them to go into debt by offering a loan but at the very same time you also tell them that you intend to increase their energy costs by getting rid of cheap coal generated electricity...increase their labor costs by pushing for a $15 an hour minimum wage...and if they DO manage to make a profit you intend to increase their taxes on that profit. What person in their right mind would make that kind of deal?

Anyone that owns a business and assumes future commodity costs will not go up is someone that no bank should lend money to. That is living in lala land. You seem to think, in conservative economic THEORY land, that all costs are fixed. Walk into any back and say "yeah I have this idea to expand my business based on no costs of doing business going up for the next 5 years". They'll say "well then you can fund your expansion with imaginary money as well, have a nice day".

That was a really bizarre statement, Issac! There is no bank on the planet that would make a large loan to a business person who hasn't estimated future energy and labor costs! If your business model calls for the majority of your labor force to be entry level, making minimum wage and legislation is pending to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour then any intelligent banker is going to inquire from you how you will deal with that eventuality. If you're a business that uses large amounts of electricity and the Federal Government is going to close down coal fired plants and replace them with more expensive solar or wind generated plants...then any intelligent banker is going to want to know if your business model can absorb that additional cost.

Walk into any bank and not have ready answers to questions like those...and you have a better chance of getting hit by lightning in your basement then you do getting a business loan.

Costs do not always go up by the way...if you're a shipping company...you've been enjoying much lower fuel costs for much of the last two years.

 

[g5000]

Real simple even a brain dead liberal can comprehend this


People want to invest with a business friendly republican president

Not so much with a anti business liberal progressive blow hard president.

Speaking of brain dead liberals, here is Donald Trump:

 

[g5000]

Trump's tax plan will add $10 trillion to the debt. I guess he doesn't think a $20 trillion debt is enough.

Trump bleevs he can deal with the federal debt the same way he dealt with his bankrupt casinos.

And if that doesn't work, Trump's Plan B for the federal debt is to print more money.

These reasons are why Trump scares the shit out of any economist with more than two brain cells.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Real simple even a brain dead liberal can comprehend this


People want to invest with a business friendly republican president

Not so much with a anti business liberal progressive blow hard president.

It's very clear that a majority of business economists disagree with your amateur hyper-partisan opinion.

Want more? 2010





$30 Billion Offer No One Wants – Small Businesses Hit by Deflation | MishTalk


When government passes out the money normally people are lined up, in advance, with both hands out. When that does not happen, it’s because the offer smells like a rotten fish.

Please check out Obama’s latest rotten fish offering as described inSmall businesses, community bankers may snub Obama’s $30 billion loan program


President Barack Obama’s $30 billion small community business lending program faces one big challenge: many of the community banks and businesses it’s supposed to help don’t want it.


The lending program is part of a bill that passed the House of Representatives on Thursday and now awaits the president’s signature. The legislation contains a mix of tax cuts and credits aimed at helping small businesses. The centerpiece of the bill is an effort to make billions of dollars available to community banks for loans to small businesses.

Bank executives say their customers don’t want loans, even at low interest rates, because the sluggish economy has chilled expansion plans. Some say the federal money isn’t worth it because they fear it will come with too much regulatory oversight

Here's the thing that liberals always struggle with when it comes to the economy. They can't understand why a business owner wouldn't jump at the chance to take out a loan to expand their business. The concept that the Private Sector works through an anticipation of profit goes right over their heads. You entice them to go into debt by offering a loan but at the very same time you also tell them that you intend to increase their energy costs by getting rid of cheap coal generated electricity...increase their labor costs by pushing for a $15 an hour minimum wage...and if they DO manage to make a profit you intend to increase their taxes on that profit. What person in their right mind would make that kind of deal?

Anyone that owns a business and assumes future commodity costs will not go up is someone that no bank should lend money to. That is living in lala land. You seem to think, in conservative economic THEORY land, that all costs are fixed. Walk into any back and say "yeah I have this idea to expand my business based on no costs of doing business going up for the next 5 years". They'll say "well then you can fund your expansion with imaginary money as well, have a nice day".

That was a really bizarre statement, Issac! There is no bank on the planet that would make a large loan to a business person who hasn't estimated future energy and labor costs! If your business model calls for the majority of your labor force to be entry level, making minimum wage and legislation is pending to raise the minimum wage to $15 an hour then any intelligent banker is going to inquire from you how you will deal with that eventuality. If you're a business that uses large amounts of electricity and the Federal Government is going to close down coal fired plants and replace them with more expensive solar or wind generated plants...then any intelligent banker is going to want to know if your business model can absorb that additional cost.

Walk into any bank and not have ready answers to questions like those...and you have a better chance of getting hit by lightning in your basement then you do getting a business loan.

Costs do not always go up by the way...if you're a shipping company...you've been enjoying much lower fuel costs for much of the last two years.

You shoehorn all things to fit what it is you want to believe. Read what I posted again and see how what you wrote is Melania style plagiarism up to the point it doesn't fit your belief system.

Yeah one of the questions on the loan app at any bank is "how will you work with the fluctuating cost of coal fired plant's energy production".

Do a search of banks online or loaning agencies, see if you can find one application that says something like that. LOL

 

[ScienceRocks]

I'd bet even less of economist and people that understand economics at the college level would agree with loserterianism. Why? Because it is bullshit.

 

[Skylar]

"A policy survey of National Association for Business Economics (NABE) members released Monday shows that 55% of business economists feel that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton would do the best job as president of managing the U.S. economy. The candidate with the next-largest percentage of the vote was Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson: 15% of NABE members said he’d do the best job managing the economy. Another 15% or respondents said they didn’t know who would be best or that they didn’t have an opinion.
Just 14% chose Donald Trump.
The survey results are remarkable because NABE members aren’t your average ivory tower-dwelling, left-leaning egg heads. They work for businesses, trade associations and government agencies across the country. As NABE director and survey chair LaVaughn Henry put it, these are people who have skin in the game.
“You’re speaking of people who advise business leaders on day-to-day and long term issues where the outcome has to be one way or the other, it can’t just be, ‘let’s study it or research it forever,’” he told FORBES in a recent interview. “These are people who are actually helping to make decisions of do we produce here, or do we produce oversees; do we consume more, consume less.”
By 4 to 1 margin, business economists say Clinton would manage economy better than Trump
America's business economist have spoken, Donald Trump wouldn't make America great. I know I am surprised, based on Trump's history.

Yeah, but what would Economists know about the economy. After all, if Trump 'knows more about ISIS than the generals do', imagine how much more he knows about economics.